For at least 7 years, Hizb ut Tahrir has been holding conferences and advancing plans for the Islamic State in Australia.
If you want a glimpse of their plans in action, look at the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. As Erdogan of Turkey often says, there is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam.
With its plans so public and concrete, how can Hizb ut Tahrir continue to operate in our country?
Why aren't its leaders in gaol?
But instead of taking action to close them down, our prime minister makes up positive stories about the "brilliant, brilliant in every respect" Islamic Caliphates of the past. Treasonous.
The article below was first published in The American Thinker. It's easy to follow and compelling. I'm sure you can think of friends or relations who'd benefit from a better understanding of the truth about Islam and I hope you'll pass this piece on to them!!!!!!!!!!
For the last few years, the world has been subjected with increasing regularity to bloody terrorism waged upon innocent civilians worldwide by the Islamic State in their holy war against all non-believers. Their warfare, once reserved and contained within the Middle East, is now a battlefield in the streets of Paris, Brussels, London, New York, Orlando, Boston, Sydney, and San Bernardino, and many other cities.
Here in the West, the many Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as CAIR (Council on American Islamic Relations, ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), and MPAC (Muslim Public Affairs Council) would have us believe that ISIS has perverted Islam. They advance a false narrative that labels Islam as religion of peace and that we non- believers have nothing to fear. In their quest to deflect any criticism of Islam, the Muslim Brotherhood even coined the term "Islamophobia" in 1991 in their Explanatory Memorandum On The General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America.
For those familiar with Quranic doctrine, the Sunna, (social, legal andtraditions of the Islamic community), the Hadith (narrative sayings and teachings of Mohammad), and Sharia (Islamic law), all disclose that the embodiment of Islam is the Islamic State.
Islamic doctrine mandates a global Islamic Caliphate where all of mankind is under the dominion of Allah and governed by Sharia.
It commands Muslims to achieve world dominance through dawa(proselytizing of Islam), Jihad, and the Hijra (immigration to the lands of non-believers). All three methodologies are now actively in play throughout the West.
While the continuous tools of "dawa" and the "hijra" command little attention by the international press and thus, inadvertently aid and abet the stealth "civilizational Jihad," the use of bloody barbaric violence by the Islamic State commends center stage.
Contrary to what the many apologetic Muslims in the West offer as an aberration of Islam, ISIS is the militant Jihad required of Muslims by Quranic doctrine. The refusal by any organized Muslim group to admit it is an act of taqiyya (deception) permissible for the advancement of Islam.
ISIS, Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaida, Al Shabab, and the numerous other Islamic terrorist organizations are the Jihadist military wings of Dar Al Harb(the House of War) as outlined in the Quran. What Western Muslims will not divulge is the written text that divides Islam into Dar Al Islam (the House of Peace for the believers) and Dar Al Harb (the House of War for all non- believers); thus, since its inception, Islam has been at war with all non-believers. Wherever Islam has raised its bloody head, violence has followed. Vast areas of the globe in the Middle East, Africa and in the Far East, once home to Christians and Jews, have been cleansed of them.
Contradicting Muslim Brotherhood apologist front groups is the nearly 66% of material contained within Quranic doctrine filled with violence directed at non-believers. In Quranic verse 9:5 Mohammad instructed his followers to "fight and kill thedisbelievers wherever you find them." In Quranic verse 9.112 he warned, "The Believers fight in Allah's Cause, they slay and areslain, kill and are killed." Likewise, Quranic verse 8:39 states "So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief [non-Muslims]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole world)." One particular command (beheadings) practiced by ISIS is found in sura 47, verse 4 which states, "so when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either conferfavor afterwards or ransom them."
Members of ISIS are fulfilling Mohammad's commandments by turning European and American cities into killing fields. Each attack strikes fear in the hearts of the non- believers and they will continue to strike fear until either we submit to Islam or Islam is defeated. From the Quran 3:151 "Weshall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve."
Additionally, the practice of Islamic subjugation of Christians, Jews, and all non-believers as well as slavery can still be found in parts of Africa. It is derived from Quranic passage 33:50 "O Prophet! We have made lawful to thee wives to whom thou hast paid their dowers; and those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned tothee." Many verses in the Quran encourage Muslim men to keep woman as sex slaves as Mohammad did in his lifetime. Today, ISIS is following in Mohammad's footsteps in parts of Syria and Iraq.
Muslim apologists often point out that these passages have been taken out of context or are practiced only in time of war. They deceptively omit that there is no context to the Quran and thatIslamic text considers itself to be perpetually at war with non-believers until global dominance is achieved. Americans must begin to learn the truth about Islam. It is not a religion by any Western standard, but is instead a violent political ideology that hides behind religion to justify the slaughter of those who do not submit.
Unlike a tumor which can be eradicated, Islam is more akin to a cancer which has metastasized within the world body organ. Like a cancer on the world stage, for the last fourteen hundred years, Islam has taken the lives of 60 million Christians, 80 million Hindus, 10 million Buddhists, and 120 million Africans. The questions that need to be asked are why was this cancer permitted to enter our collective American home and how many more of usneed to die before this cancer will be eradicated once and for all?
Shari Goodman is an educator, activist, and journalist. Her political commentaries have appeared in American Thinker, World Net Daily and other publications. She is a red dot residing in the blue state of California.
"Democracy is a system that is contrary to Islam (because) legislative authority is given to someone other than Allah, may He be exalted. In these systems legislation has been promulgated allowing abortion, same-sex marriage and usurious interest (riba); the rulings of sharee‘ah have been abolished; and fornication/adultery and the drinking of alcohol are permitted. In fact this system is at war with Islam and its followers.
The scholars of the Standing Committee for Issuing Fatwas were asked:
Is it permissible to vote in elections and nominate people for them? Please note that our country is ruled according to something other than that which Allaah revealed?
It is not permissible for a Muslim to nominate himself in the hope that he can become part of a system which rules according to something other than that which Allaah has revealed and operates according to something other than the sharee’ah of Islam. It is not permissible for a Muslim to vote for him or for anyone else who will work in that government, unless the one who nominates himself or those who vote for him hope that by getting involved in that they will be able to change the system to one that operates according to the sharee’ah of Islam, and they are using this as a means to overcome the system of government, provided that the one who nominates himself will not accept any position after being elected except one that does not go against Islamic sharee’ah.
Is Islam compatible with democracy?
Islamic law is absolutely incompatible with democracy. It is a theocratic system with Allah alone at its head. Allah's law is interpreted by a ruling body of clerics. There is no room for a secular political system in which all people are treated as equals.
Quran (33:36) - "It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision."
Quran (18:26) - "Allah... makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule"
Quran (45:21) - "What! Do those who seek after evil ways think that We shall hold them equal with those who believe and do righteous deeds,- that equal will be their life and their death? Ill is the judgment that they make." Unbelievers are not equal to Muslims. This is dutifully reflected in Islamic law.
Quran (5:44) - "Whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed is among the disbelievers" This is one reason why terrorists openly fight for an Islamic state against democracy and secularism.
Quran (39:9) - "Are those who know equal to those who know not?"
Quran (4:141) - "...And never will Allah grant to the unbelievers a way (to triumphs) over the believers." This is at odds with democracy, which allows anyone to serve in a position of power over others regardless of religious belief.
Quran (63:8) - "...might (power) belongeth to Allah and to His messenger and to the believers;" ie. not to anyone else.
Quran (5:49) - "So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee" Allah's Qur'an takes priority over the desires of the people. A democratic nation is by nature one that is not governed by Islamic law, meaning that a Muslim citizen would have divided loyalty. It's clear from this verse which side he must choose.
Quran (12:40) - "...Allah hath sent down no authority: the command is for none but Allah..." Sometimes translated as "None have the right to legislate except Allah."
Quran (4:123) - "Not your desires, nor those of the People of the Book (can prevail): whoever works evil, will be requited accordingly. Nor will he find, besides Allah, any protector or helper."
Quran (4:59) - "O you who believe! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority from among you..." Obedience is strictly limited to a government drawn from believers, not from the broader community. This verse has also been used to justify submission to autocratic rule, however oppressive it may by. As an Arab tradition put is: "tyranny is better than anarchy."
Quran (9:3) - "...Allah and his messenger are free from obligation to the unbelievers..." Muhammad used this "revelation" to dissolve a standing treaty and chase non-Muslims from their homes if they wouldn't accept Islam. This practice would be incompatible with democratic rule, in which everyone is considered equal.
From the Hadith:
Muslim (19:4294) - "When you meet your enemies who are polytheists [Christians...], invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them ... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them" Non-Muslims are intended to be subordinate to Muslims.
Bukhari (88:219) - "Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler."
Bukhari (89:251) - Allah's Apostle said, "Whoever obeys me, obeys Allah, and whoever disobeys me, disobeys Allah, and whoever obeys the ruler I appoint, obeys me, and whoever disobeys him, disobeys me." The ruler referred to here is the Caliph, who is appointed by Allah, not by popular election. Democratic rule has no legitimacy against the will of the Caliph who, as we see by chain of reference, has the authority of Allah.
At-Tirmidhi 169) - There is no obedience to anyone who is in disobedience to Allah
Nidhal Guessoum is a professor of physics and astronomy at the American University of Sharjah. You can follow him on Twitter at: www.twitter.com/@NidhalGuessoum. His column first appeared in Gulf News last week.
It's beyond belief that a university could allow this farce to continue for 5 years - and then to accept the Thesis for assessment!
And all because the Quran says God laid the earth out like a carpet - flat.
The Arab world will continue to suffer educational and cultural crises until it properly digests the different methodologies of science and religion
By Nidhal Guessoum, Special to Gulf News
Published: 19:36 April 10, 2017
Last week, a huge scandal rocked the Tunisian and Arab scientific and educational world: a PhD student submitted a thesis declaring Earth to be flat, unmoving, young (only 13,500 years of age), and the centre of the universe.
Going even bolder and further, the student explicitly rejected the physics of Newton and Einstein, the astronomy of Copernicus and Kepler, the cosmology of the Big Bang, the main models of atmospheric and geological activity, and most of modern climatology.
The student submitted her thesis after five years of work; it was then sent to two assessors, thus passing the first stage of approvals. The reports were expected soon, for the thesis defence to be scheduled.
It was at this stage that fate luckily intervened: a copy of the thesis was “leaked” to the former president of the Tunisian Astronomical Association, who checked that it was not a hoax and then quickly rang the alarm by posting on Facebook the general conclusions of the thesis, verbatim.
Gulf News readers may recall that two years ago, I wrote a column lamenting the talk that a Saudi cleric had given in the UAE insisting that Earth does not rotate, neither around itself nor around the Sun; I described the moment as a “debacle” and tried to draw lessons from it.
This new scandal is much worse, because it does not come from a cleric (that was bad enough) but rather from a PhD student in science, her supervisor held the Professor rank (the highest in academia), and they were explicitly rejecting major parts of modern science.
They also went further than just submit a thesis, they published a paper (in an obscure and disreputable journal) presenting “physical and astronomical arguments” for geo-centrism (Earth being central and fixed in the universe).
The paper is available online, and anyone can quickly check that both the paper and the journal are worthless: countless grammatical errors, mediocre references, puny scientific arguments; the journal is classified as “fake and predatory”, one of those “pay and we’ll publish your article quickly, with no reviewing or editing”...
I don’t mean to belabour the point, but it is worth citing a few ideas from the general conclusion given at the end of the thesis, if at least to fully impress upon the reader the size of the calamity that has just occurred — before we analyse its causes.
The “results” of this doctoral thesis include: the Earth is flat and young, and it stands immobile at the centre of the universe, which is made of only one galaxy; the sun’s diameter is 1,135km (not 1.4 million km), the moon is 908 km wide, and they lie 687 and 23 times closer to Earth, respectively; there are 11 planets; stars are “limited” in number and have a diameter of 292 km (not millions of km).
How does one explain such stunning ignorance of basic astronomy, coupled with such brashness and insolence — rejecting Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Einstein, Hubble, and everything in science?
In this particular case, I believe this was due to an adherence to religious, scriptural literalism, in other words taking the meanings of religious texts literally and blindly, at the cost of rejecting all knowledge that appears to contradict it, no matter how much evidence supports it.
Indeed, we find in the conclusions of the thesis clear indications of this stand and approach, expressions such as: “using physical and religious arguments”, “also proving the world scale of [Noah’s] flood”, “proposed a new kinematic approach that conforms to the verses of the Quran”, “the roles of the stars are: (1) to be ornaments of the sky; (2) to stone the devils; and (3) as signs to guide creatures in the darkness of earth”; and finally “the geo-centric model... accords with the verses of the Quran and the pronouncements of our Prophet.”
Flat-Earthism has lately been making a comeback and spreading like bush fire through social media.
Search for “flat earth” on YouTube and you’ll find almost a million videos; “flat earth society” gets 400,000 pages on the web; “flat earth proof” gets you 200,000 pages; etc.
But this social media trend I attribute to people’s inclination toward conspiracy theories: “Nasa has faked the moon-landing”; “Nasa photoshops space images”; “Give us real proofs that these interplanetary spacecraft are factual”; etc.
In 2001, when the internet was still young, and the “moon-landing hoax” was just emerging as a trending meme (without social media to support its spread), I gave several talks titled “Did Nasa fake the moon landing... or are we miserably failing to educate the public?”
But the latest shocking event (the PhD thesis) implies that we are not only failing to educate the public (that is manifest in the trendy “flat earth” and “Nasa lies” memes on social media) but also our brightest students.
It has been reported that the PhD student had previously graduated at the top of her class.
What we are failing to clarify and communicate is how to distinguish between scientific knowledge (facts, models, theories, etc.) and religious knowledge (what verses mean and what they intend to teach us).
I believe the Arab-Muslim world will continue to suffer educational and cultural crises, not to mention a total lack of understanding of science, until it properly digests the different methodologies of science and religion, without diminishing the value of each.
To quote Dorrie Evans of Number 96, "why wasn't I told?"
Thanks to James Jeffrey who let the cat out of the bag about these blokes yesterday.
Isn't it great to see a bunch of daggy blokes having fun - and being blokes?
The ancient prophesy that 3 brothers with flowing hair would rise in song is recorded here in their classic Ba'hari Ghibb.
Here's the boys website - check out the gigs!!!!!!
And this tells the story of their generalised masculine brouhaha - with the best songs of all time for taking over a pub (nb, You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin' is unassailably number one if you can pull it off. Surefire!)
For party machine men like Senator Watt it probably depends on whose genitals are copping the mutilation.
For me, it's a bit different.
I don't want to live in a country that thinks forced marriages or hacking into someone's genitals with a razor blade are "distractions" that "don't rate".
There's a lot to dislike about a system that installs a party machine man like Murray Watt into the parliament.
A distraction that doesn't rate - that'll do me perfectly when unwelcome thoughts of Murray Watt come to mind.
Here's his Wikipedia entry.
Murray Patrick Watt (born 20 January 1973) is an Australian Labor politician who was a member of the Legislative Assembly of Queensland from March 2009 to March 2012 and has represented Queensland in the Australian Senate since being elected at the July 2016 election.
Background and career
Watt was educated at Brisbane State High School and in 1996 graduated from the University of Queensland with a Bachelor of Commerce/Bachelor of Laws. He was a solicitor (1997–2002) and judge's associate (1999–2000). He was a public servant in the Queensland Department of Premier and Cabinet and the Department of State Development (2007–09) and chief of staff to Anna Bligh (2002–07; 2008). He had long been active in the Australian Labor Party, serving as President of Queensland Young Labor in 1998 and delegate to various state conferences. In 2009 he was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Queensland for Everton, succeeding Rod Welford, who retired. He was defeated for re-election at the 2012 state election.
Watt is a senior associate with the Brisbane office of Maurice Blackburn.
Following announcement of the retirement of Senator Jan McLucas, in 2015 Watt was endorsed as a Labor Senate candidate for Queensland at the 2016 federal election and subsequently elected.
BarryJ is a foundation supporter of this website and the cause of getting to the truth in the AWU Scandal.
He's now enjoying life in the sunshine state after a successful career as a senior business figure, working both here and in the US in household-name roles.
Barry's been a consistent source of good advice to me - and I know he's been generous with others too including MPs and journalists.
On 16 November 2013 Barry wrote to Tony Abbott and others in the LNP:
In todays Australian there are two articles on the subject of Union fraud, one by Hedley Thomas andanother by Michael Smith. Both articles are in the National Affairs section. You and all your parliamentary colleaguesneed to read both articles, they are damning of the previous Govt and their "friends" in the Industrial Relation industry.
If there is one thing that will turn Tony Abbott's Govt into a one term wonder it is how you guys handle this issue.
Barry's a Queenslander and he knows how the Labor Party works.
For two decades two words have described the source of ALP power.
Gillard, the Union and the Labor Party
Opinion - BarryJ
Rudd was ‘used’ to win the 2007 election because he was the only one acceptable to the voters. He was never going to be long term because he was not a Union man. At that stage Bill Ludwig controlled the AWU and by default the ACTU. He knew Rudd because both are Queenslanders and he knew Rudd’s political style was needed to win the election. He has never been a fan of Rudd.
Once they won power, formed Govt, and ran the country for a period of time it was up to the Union backed members to show who could oust Rudd and be acceptable to the voters and the Unions. Ludwig was still the party strongman and it was he who would anoint the Judas.
Ludwig knew Gillard from her days at S & G and her involvement in the AWU. If she performed with some credibility in Parliament she was a shoe in to knock Rudd out. Why? Because Ludwig had enough on Gillard to control her and thus control the Party. Piggy Howes may have “had” Gillards back but Ludwig “owned” Gillard... lock stock and barrel.
When the AWU fraud hit the fan Gillard had to eventually be removed as PM because, with her in the limelight, the heavies in the Opposition and media would keep going after her. The Left media needed a reason to kill the story and get Gillard of the hook and keep her out of goal. The Left media wanted her to remain PM, she was their pin up girl, but the end result if she stayed was not palatable to them. If she went under old Bill would have followed her down and old Bill was going to make sure he stayed afloat. Remove Gillard and the AWU issue goes away because the Opposition and media would lose interest (which they did). The Party was/is full of no-hopers so Rudd was their only choice to replace her. They knew they would get tossed anyway, (Abbott had taken 10 seats off them in 2010) old Bill knew it and did not want to sacrifice his real choice Wee Willy Wanker. Albanese was not acceptable to many of the Union heavies so old Bill’s boy, Wee Willy, slipped through a crack and got the job of Opp leader.
Sadly our Politicians of all persuasions, our media both Left and Right, our Law Enforcement Agencies, our Legal system and our Judiciary have no stomach to see Gillard brought to justice to be found either guilty or not guilty of fraud.
Michael Smith has enough paper evidence to sink a ship let alone sink Gillard and Wilson but it looks like the Legal system and Judiciary have no interest in accepting it. Thus only Ralph will go to court.
We all ask why. Well, it’s all about SELF INTEREST.
The politicians are more concerned about what might be discovered about their own misdeeds of the past. The media is dominated by socialist ideology, (even Murdoch has moved to the Left now that his sons have most of the say). Law Enforcement appear to be influenced by their attachment to the Police Union. Lawyers are renowned for sticking together like shit to a blanket. Who can say what makes our Judiciary tick but they are appointed on the recommendation of a politician, the AG.
Our only hope is that Ralph’s legal team has the intestinal fortitude to fight for ALL the evidence to be produced in court in Ralph’s defence. Let us also hope that Ralph’s legal team have the wit to use Michael Smith as a consultant so he can present ALL his evidence for them to use.
On 23/8/12, the day Julia Gillard as then PM launched the public phase of the conspiracy to pervert the course of justice at a Press conference, coincidentally(?) Fairfax media had an article by Phil Coorey and also an Editorial. Phil Coorey asked Gillard a question about Blewitt, referring to his own article. Journalist: 'The story today about Ralph Blewitt leaving Indonesia in 2009 with the police after him and left owing a lot of money. When you dealt with him, did you find him a shonky character then'? PM: 'Phil, that’s a question really that no-one could answer. Did I have any reason to believe that Mr Blewitt was involved in the kind of conduct that has subsequently come to light? No, I did not.' http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/union-official-in-pm-row-fled-indonesia-20120822-24muy.html#ixzz25iWyKS2x http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/editorial/the-pm-her-exlover-the-cartoonist-the-union-and-the-media-social-and-otherwise-20120822-24m86.html#ixzz25j03IyDv Curiously, both Coorey's article and the Editorial contained allegations (but also excuses for the 'young lawyer') that appeared to be far more defamatory than 'The Australian' article Gillard used as a pretence to introduce the subject into a Press conference allegedly called to discuss illegal immigrants arriving by boat, courtesy of people smugglers.
And a short time ago - this!
Remember this? http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/05/there-is-no-smoking-gun-there-is-nothing-more-to-this-phil-coorey-23-august-2012.html And these. (Unfortunately, the external links may be behind a pay wall now) hillbilly33 said... Reply Saturday, 02 February 2013 at 09:55 PM http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/02/philip-coorey-in-the-afr-on-the-roxon-mcclelland-thomson-elliot-evans-crossin-and-peris-moves-why-wh.html Phil Coorey is one of the three wise Fairfax monkeys with Ringmaster Tim Lester, who are cheerleaders in the **LAGS Club, and in Gillard's loop. Michelle Grattan and the hapless Jacqeline Maley are the other two. They get forewarned of "ambush" press conferences as on 23/8/12, so they can publish articles the same day which echo the words from the same McTernan song-sheet being used by Gillard. If Coorey is having trouble putting a positive spin on the latest Rats deserting sinking ship episode, Gillard is in deep doo-doo! (**Labor And Gillard Sycophants). http://media.smh.com.au/news/national-times/gillard-defence-analysed-3578137.html Only watch if you have a strong stomach and I would advise wearing gumboots to wade through all the Bullsh-t. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/with-her-back-to-the-wall-real-julia-shows-her-mettle-20120823-24p3p.html More Maley toadying!