A community hall conference held in Sydney, Australia by Hizb ut-Tahrir, a well known jihadist organization which has been “campaigning for Sharia law”, discouraged children from singing the national anthem and refused to condemn the Islamic State. The event was replete with: gender segregation, the declaration that the national anthem was oppressive to Muslims, support for the Islamic State, the promotion of amputations for punishments and a full rebuke of diversity, multiculturalism and tolerance.
While all this might sounding shocking to most Westerners, it is not shocking in the least to those who understand that normative Islam is supremacist in doctrine and promotes the doctrine of a world divided in two, between the House of War (Dar al Harb) and the House of Islam (Dar al Islam), where infidel countries are deemed to be ‘houses of war’ that must be brought under subjugation to Islam. Normative Islam’s decrees are immutable and its laws are an official closed corpus.
Western constitutions and laws are regarded in Islam as inferior to the Islamic sharia; and the doctrine of the Islamic State–although practiced more crudely–is the same Salafi doctrine that governs Saudi Arabia and many Islamic countries. The mystery of this news only lies in the question of why it was allowed to take place in Australia in the first place. The conference represented an open declaration of war against Australia (and the West), and among other things, it violated the principles of equality and human rights under Western constitutions.
“‘We’ve bought into the lie that is tolerance and diversity’: Inside radical Muslim group Hizb ut-Tahrir’s Sydney conference – where gender segregated members heard children should not sing the national anthem”, by Stephen Johnson, Daily Mail, April 27, 2019:
A radical Muslim group held a conference on Saturday afternoon discouraging members and their children from singing the Australian national anthem – while refusing to condemn ISIS.
Global Islamist political group Hizb ut-Tahrir, which is campaigning for Sharia law, hired a community hall at Campsie, in Sydney’s south-west, for the event.
Yellow taped lines were placed on the carpet segregating men at the front from women at the back, with Daily Mail Australia witnessing ushers directing men to sit at the front of the auditorium.
This was despite a 2016 New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal ruling which found Hizb ut-Tahrir’s gender segregation policies at public events were a form of unlawful sex discrimination.
After taking a seat Daily Mail Australia was asked to leave the Orion Function Centre as about 300 Muslim men, women – all wearing either hijabs or niqabs – and children were arriving.
Asked why the media wasn’t allowed at the four-hour ‘Unapologetically Muslim’ forum, this reporter was informed it was an ‘Islamic conference’ and complied with directions to leave.
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia live streamed the event on Facebook, featuring high school English teacher Sufyan Badar on stage interviewing Wassim Doureihi.
Mr Doureihi told the audience he discouraged his children from singing Advance Australia Fair at school.
‘My kids go to a public school and every so often, I think it’s once or twice a year, whatever it is, they play the national anthem,’ he said.
‘Personally, out of respect, my kids will stand up but they won’t sing.’
Mr Doureihi, a leader of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia, declared the national anthem was oppressive to Muslims.
‘Should we stand up and sing along? Or should we take a position that expresses our resistance against what the national anthem represents? It’s colonialism,’ he said.
‘As Muslims we are under the spotlight and as Muslims we have to take positions on things that are not going to be comfortable.’
In another part of the conversation, Mr Doureihi laughed when Mr Badar asked him if ISIS should be condemned.
In 2014, Mr Doureihi repeatedly refused to condemn ISIS in an ABC Lateline interview.
On Saturday night, he likened denouncing the Islamic State terror group to being asked to disown paedophilia.
‘Imagine someone comes into the room and looks at us both. Looks at us both and says these two are a bunch of paedophiles,’ he said.
‘And they come up on stage and they say, “Do you condemn paedophilia?”
‘Would I actually respect that question and give a yes or a no? Why would I do that?
‘Why would I humiliate myself and accept to be framed in this way?’
In another part of the discussion, Mr Doureihi condemned an elderly white, pro-refugee male customer at his shop who had described Sharia law Hudud punishments as ‘barbaric’, which can involve the amputation of a hand for stealing.
‘We’ve probably bought into the lie that is tolerance, diversity and multiculturalism,’ he said.
‘We’re sold the rhetoric of acceptance of diversity, and different people’s and different opinions and different religions but not realising the reality of what that entails….
Spiro says
I though people said this stuff was only from radical Islam
Sounds like it’s mainstream Islam after all
Of course I must have miss understood or does Islam teach what it
Islam teaches
Jack_Sprw says
It is what it is
mortimer says
Responding to Spiro: You are correct. Scientific polling shows Muslims are very inconsistent in applying what Islam teaches. Opinion surveys reveal these wide disparities and contradictions. 15% of Muslims self-declare as supporters of jihad-terror, but 85% do not want terrorism at all. While 65% of Muslims worldwide say they want Sharia law (without knowing what that entails … nor could they accept living under it), 35% of Muslims are virtually apostates, remaining only as non-practicing ‘cultural Muslims’. Over 1/3 of ‘Muslims’ may actually be ‘former Muslims’.
The above is called ‘Muslimology’ (the ‘opinions’ of Muslims), but to get a perfect idea of what Islam teaches, skip looking at inconsistent and uninformed Muslims and look at Mohammed. Whatever Mohammed portrayed and said is authentic. The rest is mere opinion and often very speculative, non-scholarly and inaccurate opinion.
When the chips are down and the jihad begins, Muslims will divide into two camps: a minority will join the jihad and risk going to jail or getting killed, but most others will leave town until things calm down and may call the cops. When commanded to join the jihad, many Muslims will quietly help out directly or indirectly, supporting the terrorists … as history reveals.
Today’s Muslims give mere lip service to Islam. They may SAY they want Sharia, but in fact, most try to get out of their ‘Berzerkistan’ hellholes to move to free, Western and culturally-Christian countries. They are hypocrites. They vote with their feet.
Most Muslims SAY they respect Mohammed, but they do not imitate Mohammed’s pedophilia, hatred, spite, polygamy, slave-trading, rape, pillaging, slaughter, contract-killings, robberies, cursing, necrophilia, or womanizing. Most Muslims actually would deplore a person today who lived like Mohammed and consider him an arch-criminal. They do not look into the amoral life of their false prophet so they remain uninformed about Mohammed’s truly vicious and perhaps insane character.
elee says
I wish I could share your optimism about how Muslims will act if/when their jihad arrives. I cannot forget, and I’d urge that no one should forget, what happened in the petite jihad laboratory that ISIS provided…….there were Christians, Yazidis and Muslims, neighbours, friends for generations…..then the jihadis showed up…..and many of the “peaceful” or “moderate” Muslims ratted out their neighbours, who were massacred if male and enslaved if female. I keep saying every Muslim is a sleeper. Of the purported non-jihadi Muslims living there how many knew they were sleepers till their jihadi brothers came and woke them? How many Muslims knew or suspected that the San Bernardino Muslims were up to something and said nothing?
Robert Porter says
Well said, elee. As Brigitte Gabriel once pointed out, talking about 15 to 20 of Muslim favouring jihad conceals the reality that this represents 270 million to more than 300 millions Muslims favouring ihad. After the Arab spring occurred in Egypt, suddenly Muslims turned on and murdered Coptic neighbours who once had been their friend. So, in my estimation, never trust a Muslim. With exceptions, Islam causes a mental disorder.
PRCS says
Yes, polling shows Muslims are very inconsistent in applying what Islam teaches.
And in their interpretation of it.
The problem:
‘Moderate Muslims’ and their useful idiots (Qanta Ahmed for example) have successfully convinced too many politicians and so-called journalists, along with our friends and neighbors that ‘by the book’ Muslims are ‘extremists’.
HRC went so far as to assert that NO Muslims are ‘terrorists’:
“Let’s be clear: Islam is not our adversary. Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.”
‘By the book’ Muslims (and many of those same ‘moderate’ Muslims) have successfully pushed the steady, incremental imposition of Islamic law in ‘unIslamic’ nations as a result.
Demsci says
PRCS, I really see your logic and believe it,
BUT … Qanta Ahmed in a way has the right to interpret Islam as she does. Why? Because in Islam there is no central authority! The names Islam and Muslim are not protected and even YOU could pretend to be a Muslim and who can denounce you then? And throw you out of Islam? Nobody.
The point you are all making is about logical, literal interpretation of Quran Hadiths Sira and then the Tafsirs. And you are right about that.
But if there is no central authority anyone can make anything out of that soup of Quran-Sira-Hadiths-Tafsirs and not be logical at all and very cherry picking and still claim to be a Muslim.
In that respect even Qanta Ahmed has the right to her own interpretation. She is merely very illogical and cherry picking, but Muslims allow her to do that, because of lack of central authority,.
Demsci says
Yes, Qanta Ahmed is, consciously or in confusion, misleading Kafirs, up to and including Fox News, with Judge Janine and Brian Kilmeade, with the lie that her version of Islam is the true version. That lie is very successful and problematic. As it makes non-Muslims think that Islam is just another religion, weird but harmless. But no, her version is certainly NOT true Islam, but at best only one of many versions of Islam. And other versions ARE dangerous.
Her version of Islam if seen as A version not THE Islam, clearly shows that the names of Islam and Muslims are not protected, there is no Central Authority.
the only difference between her and ISIS and the wahhabists etc is that they are logical, consistent and say the sacred texts are prescriptive, still valid, whereas she is illogical, cherry picking and relying on the sacred texts in large part being only descriptive.
but if logic is discarded, her version is as valid as that of the wahhabists. And she is confusing the Muslims. And we can add to their confusion. Maybe even with stimulating more deviating versions of Islam.
PRCS says
Part 1: Yes, she and every other Muslim–here–has the legal right to their own ‘personal’ Islam. That that is not true everywhere was gruesomely demonstrated–frequently, publicly, and recorded in living color–during the Islamic State’s reign.
Part 2: Yes, the credulous acceptance that she represents ‘true’ Islam is problematic. Very problematic.
(She was on another Fox News program early this morning).
Given that Islam is open to interpretation, we ‘filthy unbelievers’ must accept that its strictest is a valid as the least. Dr. Ahmed has convinced too many that the strictest is invalid.
gravenimage says
We believe that Muslims have the right to interpret Islam any way they want–but few pious Muslims believe this.
And while devout Muslims do indeed differ on a few matters, that of forcing Infidels to submit to Islam is universal for all orthodox Muslims.
Demsci says
Gravenimage, I did not mean to say that Muslims have the right to believe what they want according to OUR laws (that is self evident), but really according to their OWN laws.
Muslims can declare lukewarm Muslims not to be Muslims (and kill them). BUT there is no central authority in Islam. But there is deathpenalty for apostasy, the opposite of protection of the names of Islam and Muslims. Because protection of those names would mean that believers of deviant versions of Islam should be thrown out of Islam by a central authority. But in contrast, they are NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE. So must stay inside and be tolerated.
Therefore, since all versions of Islam thus seem equally valid, and no Muslim can ever be thrown out, that means that there is no one clear version of Islam.
Those who do not give Islam the honor of being totally clear, have LESS respect for Islam as those that do give it this honor in my view.
David Wood and Apostate Prophet at times also joke about how Allah is such a clumsy communicator (according to Muslims, not me, I think Islam is manmade).
My vision on Islam as unclear is meant to weaken it, and to make both Muslims and leftists, and their “dupes”, realize this weakness.
Demsci says
And Qanta Ahmed is from “Clarion Project” of Ryan Mauro, who thinks like me, as does Daniel Pipes, long since.
Then there are those like her; Zuhdi Jasser, Majid Nawaz, Irshad Manji, Asra Nomani etc.
It is my idea to: let us use them to confuse Muslims and leftists and “their dupes/ copycats”.
Demsci says
Then there is Gerd Puin who declared that fully 20 % of the Quran is “meaningless gibberish”, did you know? That to me computes “unclarity”.
Demsci says
And how CAN the Quran Sira hadiths be clear? They have never been updated for over a 1000 years? And now it is still explaining everything essential in a clear, actionable way????
Demsci says
We want indeed to destroy “Obamas lie” that “Islam is CLEAR and GOOD.”
But do we do it by saying “Islam is CLEAR and BAD” or
By saying “Islam is very UNCLEAR AND very PRONE to very BAD interpretations”?
Demsci says
Very infornative Mortimer. And I take what you say as gospel!
But what I hear from leftists is; first you have to ask Muslims if texts are either still PRESCRIPTIVE or now only DESCRIPTIVE? Or, put in other words; do they have to be seen only in the context of their time?
Or, maybe, not applicable in peace time, but indeed applicable in war time.
How do we thoroughly master the PRESCRIPTIVE-DESCRIPTIVE divide? Because leftists with one touch dismantle our arguments by saying: Oh, you think that text you mention that is no longer prescriptive, but must be seen as only DESCRIPTIVE. Just as Christians say that the Old Testament is no longer prescriptive but only descriptive.
And never forget; there simply is no central authority in Islam who can make the final decision, so Muslims are very free in their interpretation, it seems.
CRUSADER says
“Peaceful Majority are IRRELEVANT.” — Brigitte Gabriel
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YnOF7y-KuHE
Demsci says
Good answer, this link, Crusader, I knew it of course, as I know so many of these experts and what they say and I believe, but it stimulates my thinking anew.
to be sure, long since I am in favor of discriminating Muslims on basis of their choice of faith. I just try to find new ways to reach that objective with reasoning with leftists and their centre en right “dupes”.
Demsci says
Could it be that large masses of Muslims simply are not woken to what their religion actually means in all its consequences? And could we Islam-savvy people ever persuade many leftists that they indeed should educate their Muslim brethren that they do follow an erratic, primitive, anti-democratic, untrue, illogical religion?
Could we ever hold leftists accountable for supporting Muslims, while letting them be so confused about a so detrimental and rather stupid religion. Something the leftists would confirm to us if they studied Islam a bit and see where the terrorism and oppression comes from, and if they are honest.
If leftists keep refusing this, perhaps, only perhaps, we should refuse them any help with climate change.
Saying; you wish to safe us from climate change, but what does it matter if you keep the Islamic threat growing ever more with your support of Islam?
PRCS says
It’s not just ‘leftists’, of course.
Demsci says
Thanks for polite reaction and mild form of criticism, disagreeing agreeably, Henry.
I take your observation to ponder. But what influenced my opinion on this subject, is that I am in a small minority in Rotterdam who thinks like JW-ers. At work, in neighborhood and on the street and in shops, and as civil servants I encounter so many Muslims. Moreover so many leftists and people who have been “indoctrinated” by them.
You know these leftists and their dupes too, up to and including in the MSM, including FOX news! All act as if there is nothing inherently wrong with Islam!
THAT is what makes me wonder if it is not really the case that Many Muslims do not understand their own religion much. Mind you if they do sort of deceit it is monumental deceit, thousands of Muslims work among us, their children mingle with ours. Our very mayor is Muslim. And still the vast majority does n’t think there is Muslim deceit. Not outwardly at least.
Me believing what JW tells me and having confirmed this with my own study, whereas the majority of those around me and in media and politics believe something else completely makes this question of what Muslims really believe and think a vexed question.
Demsci says
So, Henry, whereas you base your opinion on the reaction or lack thereof of Muslims to terror I try to square what all my close fellow non-Muslims think of Islam with what I know of Islam.
thebigW says
right on, Henry.
“It’s not just ‘leftists’, of course.”
Yeah, it’s also people on Jihad Watch, like PRCS, Demsci, mortimer, believin’ Quanta Airlines (Qanta Ahmed) might be “confused” or this or that rather than doin’ stealth jihad. Sure anything “might be” something else, but do we have the luxury of playing Russian roulette?
PRCS says
tbw,
You’re confusing me with someone else.
I’ve never said she’s ‘confused’.
Rather, that she’s mesmerized a great many folks (Pirro, Kilmeade, et al) who should be at least skeptical about her claim.
“Given that Islam is open to interpretation, we ‘filthy unbelievers’ must accept that its strictest is a valid as the least. Dr. Ahmed has convinced too many that the strictest is invalid.”
gravenimage says
Dear Demsci, I’m afraid that all too many Muslims know *exactly* what their hideous creed teaches–were this not the case, we would not see so many Jihad terror attacks as we do.
Demsci says
The Big W, I do envisage a strategy of sorts. I vehemently expose the lie that Qanta Ahmed’s Islam version is THE TRUE ISLAM. If you thought that I believed that then no. And so I do not ignore any “stealth jihad”. I simply have a different strategy to the same end goals as you all.
You tell the world, including the leftists and,say, their allies or dupes, from center to right, among journalists, politicians and oh so many ordinary ignorant people:
Islam is clear, bad and dangerous. The whole Islam is and it is the strictest form of Islam that is the authentic one. Therefore we must discriminate all Muslims on ground of their choice of religion in our countries.
I like to tell this same world: Look, it is Muslims themselves, and leftists themselves, Journalists, politicians, citizens THEMSELVES who say:
A. there are different versions of Islam, there are harmless versions of Islam. But who by now
B. Cannot possibly deny the connection between Islam, Muslims and …… 34000 terrorist acts, oppression of women and minorities in Islamic countries and of a horrible history of 1400 years of jihad. And all this can be proven.
So, if there are both A + B versions and the B version is bad and dangerous, and since outwardly Muslims cannot be distinguished, there is ample reason to discriminate against Muslims on ground of their chosen religion in our countries.
I am therefore every bit as you all in favor of discrimination on ground of being Muslim in our countries.
I just say that Islam is NOT CLEAR, certainly not clear and good (as so many Muslims, leftists and allies pretend) but UNCLEAR, but because of B-version still very dangerous. And still a choice of Muslims.
I just don;t know which approach is more likely to succeed. I do know that there is very ingrained resistance against the idea that Islam is CLEAR and BAD. As this is perceived to “brush all Muslims with the same brush” and bigotry.
gravenimage says
Australia: Jihad-linked group teaches rejection of national anthem, diversity and tolerance in conference
………………
Of course they will not condemn ISIS, pedophilia, or hacking off limbs–these things are all orthodox Muslim.
keith says
Ah, diversity at it’s best.
The prime minister Scot Morrison aka SCROTTO. and the greens party would be so proud of what they are achieving.
James Cameron says
The moral seems to be, that treason and sedition and disloyalty are totally OK – as long as one is Muslim.
Muslims really *are* superior to us lesser mortals. Churches can be defecated and pissed in by Muslims, and that is totally OK, because Christianity is just a stupid and murderous cult that believes a lot of mindless rubbish – but Islam is a “noble religion”, “a religion of peace and love”, and the Prophet was the first feminist and a man of peace and tolerance who taught respect for other religions. This is why Islam has produced so many scientists and explorers, and why it was intellectually superior to the superstion-ridden Christian world that was sunk in darkness for a thousand years.
Supposedly.
mortimer says
No, James, the betrayal of the kafir is not gratuitous or whimsical (there is a logic to it), but is practiced when it is opportune for the advance of Islam … it is not done when Muslims want to maintain a useful commercial contact or relationship … bad for business … you cannot predict when that betrayal will be … you predict who will be a jihadist. I recommend you learn Islamic teaching from its primary source texts, rather than speculate or guess: for instance, the biggest ‘grievance’ of Allah in the Koran is that ‘wrong-worshippers’ (mushrikoon) add partners to Allah (The Holy Trinity, for instance). This is the most heinous sin for Allah, and for that reason, he wishes Muslims to enslave and eradicate Christians and yet still extort money from them. Allah rants, but is not consistent or logical.
Muslims attack Christians on their principle feasts which emphasize the Incarnation of Christ and the worship of him as part of the Godhead. This is what Muslims call ‘shirk’. The execution of wrong-worshippers (mushrikoon) is called ‘justice’ by Muslims.
Mr Doureihi would be ‘unapologetic’ about the execution of mushrikoon.
Heather says
You are funny.
CRUSADER says
Humor heals.
James Lincoln says
The feature article stated:
“The event was replete with: a full rebuke of … multiculturalism…”
This is among the most disturbing statements in the article.
It seems like the Global Islamist political group Hizb ut-Tahrir wants:
A single culture in their host country.
If they want a single culture in their host country, they can either:
Assimilate into the culture of their host country (never happen).
or
Make the host country assimilate into their imported Islamic culture.
Since they are already in the host country, and apparently plan to stay, according to Islamic teachings they would force the host country to assimilate into their Islamic culture and form a new Islamic Republic – complete with sharia law.
By all indications, and by their own words, that is the ultimate endgame.
PRCS says
The ‘or’ is correct.
Wellington says
No surprise. And why no Muslim anywhere on earth should be expected to be loyal to anything other than Mo’s creed and the effing Ummah.
Some Muslims might sincerely think that pledging permanent allegiance to a non-Islamic polity is, excuse the expression, “kosher,” but these Muslims are ignorant and confused about their own religion, and relying upon ignorant and confused people, even assuming they are sincere, is a very foolish thing to do.
Conclusion: Trust no Muslim anywhere. Proceed from this vantage point since liberty, I mean real liberty, depends upon it. After all, would you trust a Neo-Nazi or Marxist with preserving freedom? Well then, why trust a Muslim?
CRUSADER says
Sounds like a potential script in the making for an episode of “LAST MAN STANDING”….
FYI says
Interesting question “Do you condemn pedophilia?”
The “prophet” muhammed was a pedophile:-
Sahih Muslim 3309 {slept with a 9 year old girl}
Sahih Bukhari 58:236
Musnad Ahmad #16245 {muhammed liked to suck the tongue of his grandson Hasan..}
Al Adab Al Mufrad #1183 “Then the prophet…opened his mouth and put his tongue in{Hasan’s}mouth”
{Apparently this activity is often associated with pedophiles:the Jimmy saville case in the UK had this man going to hospitals and doing just that.The same behavior of muhammed{APFh.,allah prays for him}}
Needless to say,muslims of course WILL deny these islamic sources..but…
Do muslims denounce pedophilia?
If so, they will have to denounce their pederast “prophet” muhammed.
abad says
I am not sure why Moslems would denounce paedophilia. Islam does not prohibit paedophilia any more than it denounces bestiality. But then I suppose Islam could not denounce Mohammad’s origins, being the offspring of some Arab guy and a female goat.
Keys says
Mr Doureihi, as I read the report, never did directly denounce ISIS or pedophilia.
He pretended to answer that he does not approve of ISIS or pedophilia. Why would he bring pedophilia in to a question about ISIS ? He’s a deceiver, like his god. He needs to be pinned down, and forced to lie directly and clearly.
Never trust a muslim. Never.
Keys says
See Wellington post here at 7:14 PM.
Keys says
Isn’t it ironic that the only statement by Allah that one can partially trust is that he is the greatest of deceivers ?
Allah: “I am the greatest of deceivers”. Partially true. This statement is likely deceitful, by definition (all deceitful), and in that sense (that it is deceit), it is true.
The “I am” part is not true. He does not exist. He is a Mohammedan fabrication.
I am. Allah can not say “I am”, because he “is not”.
If he says “I am”, it is deceit.
I deceive, therefore, I am – not.
Lies are not true. Lies are not reality. Lies are nothing. Lies are death.
Clear confusion.
elee says
Hey Aussies, I hope your government is doing a better job of infiltrating and surveilling than Sri Lanka did. Oh and CRIPPLING PREEMPTION too.
Jayme says
Here in Canada we have the blacks on the left saying there like natives which in turn has upset a lot of native groups.
With in the neat future we could have a civil war between Natives/blacks/Muslims all 3 want to take over the country.
mortimer says
Response to Jayme: Don’t count on the indigenous Canadian Indians going along with the promotion of Islam. They privately understand the threat very well.
CRUSADER says
ACT for Canada .ca
mortimer says
Speaker Doureihi said, “…should we take a position that expresses our resistance against what the national anthem represents? It’s colonialism.”
But HIS ISLAMIC COLONIALISM is fine. And he will not apologise for it.
mortimer says
Islamism is a discriminatory medieval system of government that denies the human rights and civil liberties of women and others.
Western elites and journalists are not doing enough to expose and hold Islamism to account.
Hizb ut-Tahrir advocates using the legal system of Western countries to remove the human rights protections of kafirs and women and move those Western countries towards discriminatory Sharia law.
mortimer says
Doureihi said, “‘We’re sold the rhetoric of acceptance of diversity, and different people’s and different opinions and different religions but not realising the reality of what that entails…”
Translation: We want to remove constitutional guarantees protecting women and non-Muslims from discrimination and subjugate them under a Muslim dictator who imposes Sharia … someone like the Sultan of Brunei.
Lt Mason says
Hizb ut-Tahrir is not indigenous to Australia. The anti-colonialism rant is out of line.
Barb says
NOT Assimilating into the Australian way of life is INVASION!
One of the Sri Lankan Easter Massacre Jihadists is reported as: “Mohamed Zaharan from his YouTube channel where he declares: “It is a sin to live in Dar Al Kufr, (a country with a non-Muslim majority)” and “Even if a Kaffir (non-Muslim) does good things, I hate him, because he is a non-believer [in Islam].”
SOLUTION 1 – Revoke all Muslim’s Citizenship! Then give them all a one way ticket to their Muslim country of choice! They will thank the Australian Authorities for getting them out of sin – because living in a non-Muslim country is SIN!
SOLUTION 2 – Close all Mosques (Islamic propagation Centers; Saudi Arabia refuses to allow Synagogues and Churches to be built in Saudi Arabia – YET, Saudia Arabia funds the building of Mosques around the world – how hypocritical!!???
Lydia Church says
In that case…
I’M UNAPOLOGETICALLY CHRISTIAN….
BECAUSE THE TRUTH NEEDS NO APOLOGY!!!
ISLAM IS NOT THE TRUTH, AND IT DOES NEED AN APOLOGY,
IN FACT MORE THAN ONE…!
The irony is that ‘diversity’ was the vehicle that brought islam to the West!
BIG mistake!!!
I also smell a future terrorist attack in that part of the world.
The non-native savages are getting restless…
Aussie Infidel says
The question of why this group was allowed to hold conferences in Australia is no mystery. The reason is because our politicians are ignorant of Islam. Over the last 50 years, I have only met two politicians who have read the Quran. Most of them wouldn’t know the difference between Hizb ut-Tahrir and Sufi mystics, and consequently they do nothing to limit their activities.
Doureihi said, “We’ve probably bought into the lie that is tolerance, diversity and multiculturalism.” Islam is the most intolerant religion ever devised. In his book, ‘The Open Society and Its Enemies’, the philosopher Karl Popper wrote about his ‘Paradox of tolerance’: “Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.” As for diversity and multiculturalism, they were both products of Marxist academics who infiltrated the university system back in the 1960s. They are different sides of the same coin, which is used to simply ‘divide and conquer’ those who do not agree with their totalitarian ideology.
‘We’re sold the rhetoric of acceptance of diversity, and different people’s and different opinions and different religions but not realising the reality of what that entails….” That’s largely because Western politicians, raised with Judeo-Christian ethics, have great difficulty in accepting the fact that a religion – ie Islam – could be so evil.
“Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia, declared the national anthem was oppressive to Muslims.” Then why don’t these miscreants get the hell out of Australia and go back to the ‘shit-hole countries’ they came from. But of course, they are not here to become Australians – but obeying their doctrine of Hijra or ‘migration in the cause of Allah’, to subjugate all other religions and cultures.
PRCS says
“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.”
And in progress today.
gravenimage says
+1
CRUSADER says
“Progress didn’t come in America
from the lack of offending….”
— Outdoor Man vlog
(LAST MAN STANDING)
Gail Griffin says
Looks like the muslims are colonizing Australia. They want things their way. Not Australian way So who are the colonizers in 2000.
jayell says
‘Colonisers’? Historically, ‘colonisers’ have as often as not demonstrated a degree of self-sufficiency whilst occupying territories that are not traditionally theirs, utilising local physical resources whilst not necessarily having any dealings at all with local social resources. These muslims not only misappropriate established territories as ‘their own’ but also leech off local communities and justify their actions in the same way that hostile medieval invaders would have done. To compare them with ‘parasites’ is, if anything, an understatement.
CRUSADER says
Just as they did with Byzantium.
na says
Failure , collapse and decline of west is due to the rule of women. Women have limitations and they are soft minded. So Terrorist can easily manage them. But west needs strong leaders. Western countries have everything, IQ, Beautiful and handsome people, educated and civilized people. Then why should you fear middle eastern and central Asian terrorist nations.
gravenimage says
Is Anti-Jihadist Christine Douglass-Williams “limited and soft minded”? How about Pamela Geller? Ayyan Hirsi Ali? What about all of the staunch Anti-Jihad women here at Jihad Watch?
If na really thinks that women are worth less than men, then he should be thrilled with Islam.
Stop Kafirophobia says
Well said!
gravenimage says
Thank you.
CRUSADER says
Beware of “Crazy Rich Asians” !!!
Anjuli Pandavar says
“Jihad-linked group teaches rejection of national anthem, diversity and tolerance in conference”
—
Of course! Do you know what is taught in madrassas?
jayell says
So they are deliberately and openly not respecting the majority of (what are supposed to be) their fellow-citizens and do not want to accommodate anyone but themselves in a country they not only had no part in building in any way whatsoever but also could not possibly have built themselves, yet whose resources they have no qualms about exploiting for their own entirely selfish gratification. That’s the definition of a pretty obnoxious toxic parasite whose very existence poses a threat to the body it infests and contaminates, and those working in horticultural and agricultural circles would have an effective (if somewhat terminal) remedy for this situation. By the way, “‘Personally, out of respect, my kids will stand up but they won’t won’t sing (the Australian national anthem)’”…….that’s NOT ‘respect’, that’s still ‘disrespect’. Does this person understand enough of the English language to know the concept of the word ‘respect’, or is that asking too much of a muslim?
Mary Murphy says
I would not think to comment on your website, but I must. I have been receiving your posts for about a month now. It’s 50/50 on who posts 1st, your posts or main stream media, but they pretty much say the same thing, especially Fox News. I do forward some of your posts to different websites to start conversations, and they sure do. I must say the responses are enlightening and aggressive. The other day I forwarded one of yours on about the jihad who blew himself up at the restaurant in Sri Lanka. Needless to say the main media had video and pics and said the same thing except yours was a one pager. All the media was talking about the muslims who did this and were watching them at different stages entering churches, etc.
So why am I writing? To inform you that I got blasted by facebook for putting up a hate post. I was “jailed” for 3 days with the option to ? why, which I did. All they said was it was against their rules. I’m still in jail. So I spent a bit of time looking thru my history. Some of my posts from your site were deleted from the groups I am in. Of course my comment back to them are comments I post or forward from/about the Dems and the muslims the news media or other group members put out there.. I guess I got too specific in my posts. I just wanted to let you know, I still belong to all my groups, and I will continue to forward posts or share after someone else does, or the media. I enjoy, if you want to call it that, in being informed.
We are going to be at war soon, if not already. God save the Crusaders and Patriots.
gravenimage says
Welcome to Jihad Watch, Mary.
Crazy that you would be suspended from social media for telling the truth–but this is becoming increasingly common.
CRUSADER says
Amen !
+ + +
UNCLE VLADDI says
Here’s a simple fact about islam which *might* even give your average muslim pause:
If and when muslims posit their god as being “unknown and unknowable,” then it’s incredibly hypocritical of them to pretend to be so outraged by other religions’ alleged tellings of “lies” about the nature of god, that they feel obliged to g out and wage war and murder them for it.
That’s really only them doubling-down on their own lies, for all religion is at best mere speculation presented as fact – in other words, it’s all a pack of lies!
Therefore, who does islam *really* benefit? Obviously, not god.
So it can only be a lying excuse to benefit its fraudulent founder, Muhammad.
And there’s a copious amount of anecdotal evidence (aka all the hadiths) to prove it, too.
UNCLE VLADDI says
Correction; i.e:
“WE SOMEHOW KNOW THAT GOD IS UNKNOWN AND UNKNOWABLE, AND IF YOU SAY OTHERWISE, YOU’RE A LIAR AND WE KEEL YOU FOR IT!”
That’s islam in a nut’s hell.
PRCS says
+1
But, shhhh.
I don’t want to be keeled.
CRUSADER says
God is knowable, and a personal God
— especially through Christ Jesus
Keel haul, all you want, damnable Muzzies!!!!
μολὼν λαβέ
molṑn labé
tim gallagher says
This mob, Hizb ut-Tahrir, are regularly in the news here in Australia when they hold their meetings. On talk back radio, the main topic for conversation, apart from loathing and disgust for this clear enemy of our values, is the question of why this group is legal in Australia, because, apparently, it is outlawed in many countries around the world. Most presenters and callers call for it to be banned. I wonder if it is allowed to hold its meetings so that our security forces can watch carefully who attends the meetings, and keep an eye on them. Or is it just that Australia is ridiculously soft and gutless for not banning the group? I think a clear majority of Australians would support its being banned. I suppose, to be thankful for small blessings, I’d say that at least this mob are upfront and honest about their revolting attitudes, instead of hiding their attitudes as some Muslims do, and pretending to be supporters of western values. This crowd make it plain that they are a clear enemy of our values.
Steven says
As always, the leftists and The Greens Party keep silence as deafening….. not a single protest or condemn from the leftists like they always have violence protests during the right wing conference and even Liberal Government Fundraising Dinner parties sincl. Tony Abbott’s last year while former Green Senator refused to condemn about the violence protest where a Lesbian sister of Tony Abbott was violence dragged by leftists and her jacket was torn…………………….. Hizb ut-Tahrir equal NAZI
Steven says
As always the leftists and The Greens Party keep deafening silence….. not a single protest or condemn on this group from the leftists as they always have violence protests at the right wing conferences and even Liberal Government Fundraising Dinner parties incl. Tony Abbott’s last year where The Greens Senator Rhiannan Lee attended and refused to condemn about the violence protest and also a Lesbian sister of Tony Abbott was violently dragged by leftists and her jacket was torn…………………….. HIZB UT-TAHRIR EQUAL ADOLF HILTER’S NAZI
Demsci says
You are right about the Leftists and the Greens. There is some kind of DE FACTO, though not official, RED-GREEN ALLIANCE.
And so many of the center and right believe the leftists version of and excuses for Islam and their narrative of Radical and Moderate Islam and so many believe that Moderate Islam is the norm and Radical the aberration.
But their brightest members, if they are honest, must see our points and the problems with Islam. it is just that they perceive America, the West, Israel and their own conservative opponents as the bigger enemy and therefore they protect Islam and Muslims and de facto ally with them against conservatives and America, West, Israel.
BUT the leftists and greens now need the conservatives to act in regard to climate change. They sound pretty urgent and desperate about the climate, they want sweeping changes in laws and policies.
Well, we can withhold our support totally for any measures in regard to climate change. Until the leftists and greens get more flexible, less rigid about their protection of Islam and (all) Muslims.
If we prepare our case for defense against Islam well, and offer in exchange help with climate change policy,
Then I think even leftists and greens will prefer power and results over hypocritical support for the religion of Islam and the humans that CHOOSE to cling to it.
Jaladhi says
Inspite of seeing this traitorous Muslim behavior the idiotic West still allows Muslims to immigrate to their countries! What’s the logic and why?? Only a death wish will explain the Western behavior!!
tim gallagher says
You’re right, Jaladhi. It is amazing and suicidal stupidity. Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia are showing the right and sensible attitude towards islam, but most western nations ignore it and keep going with their idiotic policies, still somehow believing that Muslims will fit in with the values of western civilisation. It is horrifying and incredibly annoying watching this happen.
Giacomo Latta says
Europeans travel to Australia to install a country: colonialism. Muslims travel to Australia to install a caliphate: AOK! When you are the master religion you are allowed to be hypocritical.
WildWelshWoman says
Moral of story: Inside every ‘moderate’ Muslim is a savage, barbaric ‘radical’ just screaming to get out.
infidel says
OMG and the Aussie Govt and authorities did NOTHING??? If this is not outright sedition, I wonder what else is. So Australia be ready for a deadly round of suicide attacks… because this is what that follows such hate filled sermons..