Yes we are a provincial backwater here in Australia, if we deny it we are fooling ourselves.

But you know that's not so bad, it gives us time to see the rest of the world taken over by Jihad before its our turn.

We also don't have great freedom of speech here, its not constitutional, and its reducing fast.

I supported this man's comments of course, I agreed with his concerns.

But Australians really hate it when a foreigner points out what we know to be true, like its OK to know your wife is a hideous hag but its inappropriate for anyone else to point it out.

That is why we accept what our leadership says but don't like it from someone else.

The Jewish lobby is gutless and should be ashamed of themselves for abandoning their man though.

Posted by: payingattention at February 17, 2007 3:31 AM

Hmmm... I wonder what the AIJAC had been expecting Dr.Israeli to say? If they (AIJAC) thought he would come and talk about how much the Muslims are "victimized" and say things like "we can all live togather in a nice, fluffy, cream covered world of peace and love" ... they (AIJAC) invited the wrong guy!

If AIJAC wanted that kind of thing, they should have invited Ibrahim Hooper. "Islamikaze" is indeed an excellent book. It is shameful how the AIJAC dhimmified themselves.

If Dr.Israeli, is half as eloquent speaking as he is writing, the the Austrailians are truly the losers.

payingattention says "...Australians really hate it when a foreigner points out what we know to be true, like its OK to know your wife is a hideous hag but its inappropriate for anyone else to point it out."

If this is the case, then again, why would AIJAC bother to invite Dr. Israeli? Did they expect him to praise them on how stunningly beautiful their "wife" is? Possibly, had Dr.Israeli stated how hideous the "wife" but clarified it that while she is truly hideous, that it is their fault, AIJAC would have found it more acceptable... and in which case, Mr.Hooper or Karen Armstrong (or the like) would have been a more appropriate choice.

Posted by: gnegypt at February 17, 2007 4:24 AM

Some stats from Winds Of Jihad by Sheik yer'mami. It's hard to say how much of the muslim population increase is through immigration. It's like an invading army hiding in plain sight.

Average Muslim migrant populations tend to double in size approx. every 10 Years.

Check this against our local Australian demographics:
2007 Approx. 300 000 Muslims 1.5 % of the population
2017 Approx. 600 000 Muslims 3 % of the population
2027 Approx. 1 200 000 Muslims 6 % of the population
2037 Approx. 2 400 000 Muslims 12 % of the population
2047 Approx. 4 800 000 Muslims 24 % of the population
2057 Approx. 9 600 000 Muslims 48 % of the population

Posted by: savitch at February 17, 2007 7:18 AM

Savitch, the parasite cannot thrive if the host refuses to support it. No free housing, food, health care, welfare money, etc. Let the arabs send the money.

Posted by: Infidel33 at February 17, 2007 12:21 PM

There is no scientific basis for Sheik Yer Mami's figures. If there is, show them here. Then we can ask the ABS. (Australian Bureau of Statistics)

Posted by: payingattention at February 17, 2007 3:10 PM

I tried to post a statement on the AJN comments page expressing my disappointment that they would not support Proffessor Israeli, but it never got published. Double shame on them. Their cowardice will come back to bite them in years to come.

Posted by: Heretic at February 17, 2007 5:36 PM

payingattention sez:

'There is no scientific basis for Sheik Yer Mami's figures. If there is, show them here. Then we can ask the ABS. (Australian Bureau of Statistics)

Go right ahead and knock yourself out!

Its not rocket-science. Do the numbers yourself:

Australia 1970: aproximately 25.000 muslims

Australia 2007: " 350.000 "

Now tell me: How many years is that how much did they multiply?

Is there any other ethnic or religious group that multiplied in similar fashion?

Thanks for paying attention!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 17, 2007 5:53 PM

Maybe yer mami did shake you as a baby.

Son, if you want to make fun of screen names go right ahead but dont be surprised if you get them straight back

The influx of Muslims into Australia was as a consequence of the Fraser government decisions of the 1970s, to give special treatment to Lebanese Muslims.

That policy does not continue.

To give wildly exaggerated extrapolations based on isolated figures is just scare mongering and damages what little credibility you have in your fancy dress suit on your web site

Posted by: payingattention at February 17, 2007 9:19 PM

Let the arabs send the money.
Posted by: Infidel33

But they do. They send Billions for madrazas and mosks. They send Billions for jihad. They are the SOWdi Arabs.

Posted by: scrualla at February 17, 2007 9:37 PM

Thanks for paying attention!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami

I tend to believe the Sheik on this one. He's simply using logic for his extrapolation. Noone likes the picture he paints - it's uglier than any SCREAM Edward Munch ever could imagine painting.

But let us not attack the messenger.

Instead let us thank him for doing the work to actually present us all with the F.A.C.T.S.

I should also point out that he is actively maintaining a blogsite AND he makes music giving voice to the pain we all feel about the juggernaut that is hitting all our shores.

I for one am always inclined to take his word.

Let us not bicker, my friends...

Instead let us begin to take active steps to resist this tsunami.

it's going to get ugly indeed. The sooner we take a decisive stand the better to avoid devastating bloodshed.

Posted by: scrualla at February 17, 2007 9:46 PM

PayingAttentioin is right.

There was a relatively brief influx of Muslim Lebanese thugs during the 80s under Whitlam and Frazer. Whitlam was looking to stack electorates with leftist voters, and Frazer was a bleeding heart moron.

Since Howard tightened the immigration requirements - to be based on applications having skills not relatives - the amount of muslim immigration has drastically reduced. Islamic countries are not, as a rule, full of highly skilled people.

Incidentally, Britain and most other countries would do well to copy our immigration policy.

Posted by: Brett_McS at February 17, 2007 10:01 PM

There is no logic in it. ON that basis the US would have a Muslim population of 250 million by 2057

Such suggestions have to be the drugs talking.

Posted by: payingattention at February 17, 2007 10:02 PM

Okay, the past is not necessarly an indicator for the future.

The immigration excesses and the mistakes of the past must not be repeated, but no western country has managed to actually stop or reverse the Muhammedan invasion. So where do we go from here?

Fact is that Muslims don't integrate or assimilate. We have no laws stopping them from finding brides in their home-countries, to have 7 children with one, divorce her and then bring the next one and do the same again and again, do we? Our welfare system takes care of them, so what's there to stop them?

Our own population (incl. western Europe and the US) doesn't grow at all. Japan and Italy are going backwards. Germany's population remains stagnant. Those are facts that can't be denied. Sure, Australia also had only 12 million people 35 years ago, now we have 20 million. Isn't the same true for Canada?
But we are not growing, most families have 1 or 2 children or none at all.

Muhammedan breeding habits will inevitably give them critical mass within 30 years. France, Holland, Belgium and Denmark including Norway are frightening examples. Even if immigration is stopped for a while, it can't be stopped completely. Their numbers may not grow as fast as in the past, but they will grow, and our numbers won't.

So instead of attacking me for pointing it out, perhaps you could constructivley engage my argument and refute me why this is not so.

Go right ahead!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 17, 2007 11:06 PM

Sheik,

Actually there is a limit on the number of brides that can be imported. A colleague from Finland, still in his 40s, has already reached it with his third wife. It seems the Finns don't get on with each other any better than they do with non-Finns.

I'm not sure what your argument is anymore - would it be "Muslim immigration: Bad"? Not much disagreement here, but better a trickle than a fire hose.

Anyway I'm not sure it is good for a society to be totally without irritants. We go soft and fall in love with socialism and generally suffer the fate of the slow-boiling frog. A level of irritation, or an occassional war, is needed to keep the societal immune system operational.

Posted by: Brett_McS at February 17, 2007 11:29 PM

Alright Sheik well seeing as you didn't need to make fun of my screen name in the last message I will constructively respond.

My answer has been for some time now

1: CAP THE BABY BONUS. We shouldn't be paying people to have children beyond 3 at the most.

2: Follow Robert's suggestions regarding immigration questions. Exclude people who have any belief in Sharia. Make such questions required for naturalisaton purposes and if found to lie then cancel citizenship.

3: Require established Australian culture and values to be taught in the schools. Close schools down that will not follow the require curriculum.

4: Use the anti communist laws we had in the 1950s as the basis of defining any political ideology whether shrouded within a religious mandate or not, which calls for the overthrow of the government as an illegal ideology and ban such activities including meeting places etc.

Theres a few points to start with.

Now Sheik, how about something constructive from you? All I am reading is scare mongering and baseless predictions.

Posted by: payingattention at February 17, 2007 11:50 PM

The words which struck me in the posted article were:

"a minor item of gossip about one individual who said something becomes a national issue"

This "globalization effect" seems to happen in many places, when islam is involved. E.g., off the top of my head: 1) The Danish Cartoon incident, 2)the recent uproar about a college humor magazine at Cambridge University, in the UK 3) brouhahas about screenings of the movie Obsession on various US college campuses...

The internet and 24 hour news networks did not exist a generation ago; they certainly contribute to this globlization of propaganda and intimidation against political incorrectitude. But back 75 to 100 years ago, when newspapers were the "media", were so many people so easily stirred up by newspaper articles? Has group pychology changed? Are people now more ignorant about the subjects which are being propagandized, and therefore more prone to believe, at face value, propaganda from muslims facilitated by news reports from talking heads and pretty faces?

What still impresses me about the Danish Cartoon controversy is the worldwide firestorm the cartoons created. The Rushdie affair, 15 or 20 years ago, was a precursor, but it didn't explode globally, the way current muslim lunacy seems to. What was different? Did the more self-confident behavior of the British government, at that time, dampen the lunacy? Why did the western media and the mainstream generally support Rushdie then, but now seems to sneer at those intimidated by muslim propaganda, or maintain "neutrality"? What has changed? Why do so many groups cave-in now? Is this the slippery slope of dhimmitude?

Posted by: del at February 18, 2007 12:05 AM

Paying attention:

"scare mongering and baseless predictions"- The numbers of past muslim-infiltration are undeniable facts.
Since 1350 years Islam has tried to conquer the west. They nearly succeeded.
300 years ago Vienna/Europe-(!) nearly fell.

500 years ago Constantinople fell.

25 years ago Cyprus was overrun by the Musulman.
Either you don't read my posts carefully or you are trying to deflect away from the facts.

Are you a muslim?

30 years ago we didn't have 30 million muslims in western Europe. Why don't you find out how many we had then and how they multiplied? Why are you so confident that they will not multiply in the same way in the future like they did in the past?

You see, I run a blog. I write articles which are published worldwide and I make music against the global jihad, at my own expense. What do you do?

If you read my blog you will get the message, inevitably. If you stick around at JW-DW LGF- you will also get the message:

We are at war. PC is killing us. If you realize what's at stake you will stop attacking the messenger and focus on the issues worthwhile attacking.

Hopefully.

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 18, 2007 6:53 AM

I'm an Australian Jew and while I agree with Professor Israeli's contention of the lack of Muslim integration into European Society causing many social problems (I even read that in Islam Muslim's have a duty to overthrow a country when they reach 20% of the population) and while I believe Islam today is basically a neo-nazi death-cult and would love to limit Muslim migration to Australia I object with Professor Israeli labelling Australia as "provincial".

Australia is in the middle of a national debate (similar to the debate going on throughout the Western world) due to the "clash of civilisations" Australia is experiencing due to Muslim immigration. In recent years, since 88 Australians were killed by Islamists in Bali this debate has been at the heart of the national consciousness. With many Muslim terror plots thwarted, Obnoxious Muslim Imans preaching hatred and stupity and the riots in Crunulla last year Professor Israeli's comments were bound to get huge headlines here.

Perhaps the Professor is falsely modest but the majority of Australians are really looking for solutions to the threat caused by Islamists and has such a visiting experts opinions are seen as important to the issue. Also, like Israel Australia is surrounded by Muslims (Indonesia, Malaysia).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Cronulla_riots

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2005_Nov_14/ai_n15801604

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2004/s1265180.htm

Posted by: big_kike at February 18, 2007 7:04 AM

sheik yer'mami, rest assured, you are quite correct, sir. After staying up a little to late last night and partaking in one too many adult beverages, my mind is a little foggy at the moment. I therefore don't have a multitude of links at my fingertips to post at the moment.

Nevertheless, the German, Italian, and other governments have officially recognized as fact that:

1) Muslims do have more children than Westerners. (Check out the CIA world fact book for one reference. Also see Steyn and official census data from the countries in question)

2) This is a serious problem. In Italy, for one, Italian women are being paid by the Italian government to have Italian babies. And I know how this so deeply offends the cross-breeders here who have no identity with their own people. (de facto Muslim supporters)

I often laugh at many of the postings here. I laugh because many of the posters here are the very Leftists that have allowed the kind of unrestrained Muslimification of the West that they now seek to stop.

But, of course, they cannot. At least not by using the same old tired arguments that the Left always puts forth. They refuse to recognize the differences among peoples. They assume, falsely, that a person taken from the "third-world" who has learned how to dress, speak, and otherwise imitate people from the West, that he is a Westerner himself. No different than any other Westerner. To say or assume otherwise would be the very height of racism. And so, they plod along in their delirium, confused about how to proceed. Confused about how to deal with Muslims without offending on racial grounds--the apex of offence for the brain-addled Left.

If, somehow, they can just get Muslims to act like Westereners, all will be well. But since they are not willing or even capable of calling a "spade a spade," they are reduced to name-calling and endless discussion about what ought to be but never will be.

Posted by: British Observer at February 18, 2007 12:05 PM

So Australia bows to their "CAIR" type group also. I thought they had more courage than that. They are doomed as well if someone does not do something. Had this man said these things about Christians or Jews, he would have been able to continue his tour, I'm sure. I'll pray for Australia while I pray for the U.S.

Posted by: lillypearl at February 18, 2007 12:17 PM

Sheik:

Your scare mongering and baseless predictions relate to your ridiculous claims about Muslim population levels in Australia over the next 40 years. I think you admitted your numbers were rubbish when you said above "Okay, the past is not necessarily an indicator for the future."

I really couldn't care less whether you run your own blog or not. By the number of times you mention it, it seems you are expecting people to especially respect you because of this. I have looked at your blog, and apart from being amused at your picture which makes you look like the gay son of Lawrence of Arabia, I didn't see anything on there that isn't already well published by sites such as JihadWatch and LGF. Seems you are more a pretender with images of your own grandeur.

You have asked:

"Are you a muslim?"

This is purely an attack designed to discredit me and shut me up. Even though such a question shouldn't warrant my answer, for your benefit the answer is "No, I am not a muslim". I am a person who looks at the facts of the problem we have with Jihad both in Australia and across the world. I don't tolerate nonsensical scare mongering from people whose main agenda seem to be self promotion.

Given the above and because you owe me for your insolent question about my religious background you can answer mine:

Are you using JihadWatch/DhimmiWatch to promote your own blog and music with a view to making money by selling your recordings?

Be honest now...

Posted by: payingattention at February 18, 2007 3:33 PM

The contention that mohammedan populations are growing significantly faster than others is well founded, well established and argued by a number of authors watching the issue.

See:

America Alone: The End Of The World As We Know It (Mark Steyn)

and,

American Congress for Truth (ACT) (Brigitte Gabriel)

Among others.

=============

The notion of doubling every 10 years is at least plausibly arguable.

As Gabriel points out, Christian Lebanese men have one wife apiece, and Christian Lebanese generally have 1 or 2 children per family.

Mohammedan Lebanese often have multiple wives and generally have 4 or more children per family, well above the replacement rate.

Think of bin Laden's father, with 50 children by a cadre of wives.

Families of 6 to 10 children are common among mohammedan Lebanese.

Whereas Lebanon used to be a Catholic country, it isn't any more, and it's the birth rate that changed it.

The same thing is happening in Paris as we read this.

The same thing can be seen in world population statistics. Mohammedans were not 20% of the world a few decades ago, they are now.

The difference is not in the growth of the moslem birth rate, but the availability of Western medicine, which has reduced the child mortality rate.

=================

Whether the actual growth rate is 2X/decade or somewhat more or somewhat less, the point stands as objectively demonstrable, that once a moslem population gains a foothold in a foreign culture, it rapidly grows to be a formidable political, and more importantly a formidable military presence.

Posted by: joeblough at February 18, 2007 4:33 PM

stupidity* (lol)

Posted by: big_kike at February 18, 2007 6:16 PM

payingattention:

Why are you so eagerly trying to smear and discredit me?
Why are you so adamant that I am 'nonsensical scaremongering' when the evidence is clear for all to see?

What is your agenda if you are not of the Muhammedan belief-system?

"Are you using JihadWatch/DhimmiWatch to promote your own blog and music with a view to making money by selling your recordings?

My music is freely available. All the songs are recorded at my own expense and by neglecting my business.

I hope to recover the cost one day, do you have a problem with that?

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 18, 2007 8:05 PM

I am an Australian and fully agree with Professor Israeli's comments regarding Muslim immigration to Australia.

Of course, his words that Muslims (or any group) who respected democracy and the rule of law represented no danger to Australia, went unmentioned in the press. Had these comments been reported he would not have been open to charges of racism and bigotry.

Posted by: BronzedAussie at February 18, 2007 10:09 PM

Sheik:

I am merely defending myself against your attacks on me by calling me a Muslim merely because I disagreed with your wild ideas about population growth in our country.

I put up my suggestions for what we could do about the Islamic threat in Australia and you have not addressed ANY of those suggestions. Instead you employ the victim mentality of Muslims by saying I am shooting the messenger etc etc etc.

You seem to think that anyone who disagrees with your wild speculation has a "mohhomeden agenda".

All I was pointing out is that you have a profit motive for what you write, and THANKS for admitting it.

Just stick to demonstrable facts and quell your name calling and accusations of me and you wont have a problem with me. Otherwise expect to receive back all the bile you dish out in kind.

Posted by: payingattention at February 18, 2007 10:31 PM

payattention:

"All I was pointing out is that you have a profit motive for what you write, and THANKS for admitting it."

Your falsehood is astounding!

Do you blame Robert Spencer also for selling his books online? Does he also have a 'profit-motive???'

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 18, 2007 10:37 PM

Sheik:

Robert Spencer publishes articles and comments on those articles. He writes books, many of which I have now.

He doesn't get into wild projections based on fantasy.

You are fooling yourself if you try to compare yourself to Robert Spencer in any way..

Posted by: payingattention at February 18, 2007 10:46 PM

Anyway I am done on this thread this is a waste of time.

Posted by: payingattention at February 18, 2007 11:03 PM

The Jewish establishment in Western nations is the real cause of Jew-hatred in the West. These phony pygmies and dwarves that pass for Jewish leaders are disgusting cowards, ignoramuses, leftist appeasers, traitors, and collaborators with the Muslim Nazis, and unless the Jewish community throws off their shackles, they will bring tragedy upon the Jews who live in the Western exile (diaspora).

Posted by: US_infidel at February 18, 2007 11:39 PM

Payattention:

You attacked me, not the other way around.

You don't like my message and you are trying to shut me up.

My 'wild projections' are from Muslim websites,- they may be exaggerated, but we must never underestimate the enemy.

Your final ad hominem attack is noted.

So is your lack of logical reasoning, your smears and your resentment.

Very Islamic indeed!

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 19, 2007 3:25 AM

That's right Sheik call everyone who doesn't agree with you a Muslim. You don't even know the meaning of ad hominem any more than you know the meaning of Old Arabic!

Just keep coming out with your "howlers" I will continue to point out all factual errors.

Posted by: payingattention at February 19, 2007 3:47 AM