Chairman Mal ringtone. Judgement.
A message from The Regent and Lucy to all right-thinking Australians

Kristina Keneally's naive apologia for Islam should be in every Bennelong letterbox

Kristina Kenneally is a pleasant woman.

She was great fronting Basketball Australia and often good on Sky News.   She's a polished spokesperson who dresses well and has a reliable repertoire of social-justice-warrior lines.

But she's also easily led and given to helping dangerous people like Eddie Obeid, Joe Tripodi, Ian MacDonald - and now you can add Bill Shorten and Australia's Islamists to that list.

Kenneally has deleted most of her Twitter history now that she's standing for the Federal seat of Bennelong.  It's now a tribal pro-Labor, pro-Left, anti-Conservative echo chamber.

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 10.49.46 am

(After copping some criticism for deleting her stuff, Kenneally published an excel spreadsheet of her Twitter history here -

She says she published the spreadsheet to silence the "conspiracy theorists" - really?  Why not leave all that stuff where it was, searchable, chronologically set out and there in all its contextual glory?)

You'll find plenty of commentary about Keneally's failed NSW Labor puppet regime and her colleagues Obeid et al elsewhere.  My focus today is her dangerous attitude towards Islam.

Earlier this year Ms Kenneally wrote this impassioned defence of Yassmin Abdel-Magied and her brand of Islamism.

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 9.56.01 am

I've reprinted Keneally's article in full below.   I hope the Christian people in Bennelong take the time to read it.

Here are a few of Keneally's claims. 


DOob0BnW0AAKb9CKeneally's claim #1: "There is zero chance that sharia law is going to be enshrined in Australia. Zero."

Shari’a, Shariah, syariah, Shariat are transliterations from the Arabic script. Sharia refers to the divinely ordained law embodied in the Qur’an (the actual word of God as revealed to the Prophet Mohammad), Sunnah (practices and traditions of the Prophet) and fiqh (jurisprudence).

All aspects of a Muslim's life are governed by Sharia. Sharia law comes from a combination of sources including the Qur'an (the Muslim holy book), the Hadith (sayings and conduct of the prophet Muhammad) and fatwas (the rulings of Islamic scholars).

The Federal Government has enshrined Sharia law in legislation concerning financial practices in Australia - so that Muslims get a reduced tax bill.

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 11.20.50 am

That was the result of this consultation process:

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 11.23.17 am

Sharia law is also applied in Australian family law.

Screen Shot 2017-11-15 at 11.26.39 am

It's here Kristina.  So much for zero chance.  And because the word of Allah as dictated by an angel in a cave is perfect and final, the Sharia too is perfect and final.  It can't be changed.  So death to apostates?  Yes, it's Allah's way.

Let's leave the last word on Zero Chance Sharia to Muslims themselves.




Keneally's claim #2:  "DOob0BnW0AAKb9CThink of the Australian institutions that would need to completely collapse to make this ridiculous idea a reality: federal parliament, state parliaments, the constitution, the courts, a free press, the rule of law, the defence forces, democracy itself."


We published this story last year - drawing the ADF's participation in promoting Islam's aims and goals to the attention of the apparently unaware defenders of our way of life.




ADF-linked website for Muslim members calls for overthrow of our government, says we are at war with Islam and its followers

The Defence publication "Guide to Religion and Belief in the ADF" provides a link for Muslim members  and their commanders to assist serving Muslim members in the practice of their faith -

The QandA section is here 

On 6 February 2015 that website published this Islamic ruling:

 98134 - Concept of democracy in Islam Published Date: 2015-02-06 

"What is the ruling on promoting democracy"?

Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajid:

"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.

107166: Ruling on democracy and elections and participating in that system Published Date: 2008-10-09  

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? 

They replied: 

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. End quote. 

Shaykh ‘Abd al-‘Azeez ibn Baaz, Shaykh ‘Abd al-Razzaaq ‘Afeefi, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Ghadyaan, Shaykh ‘Abd-Allaah ibn Qa’ood. 

Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (23/406, 407)



DOob0BnW0AAKb9CKeneally claim #3 - "I also know that our fellow Islamic citizens in Australia overwhelmingly join me and the rest of us in condemning sharia as an oppressive, archaic, harsh and undemocratic code of law."

No less an authority than the head of the Council of Imams would beg to differ.

And he's in charge of what gets spruiked in the Mosques on Friday Kristina.




Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 1.33.09 pm


"Never become like them".

Turnbull's decision to invite this dangerous psychopath to his official residence for dinner casts further doubt on his judgement and fitness to lead our government.

And here's the Sheikh of Hate asking that question on everyone's lips - can we kill civilians who aren't Muslim?


Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull dines with hate preacher


AN Islamic preacher — who once called AIDS a divine punishment for gays and for God to “prepare us for jihad”- dined with Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull at Kirribilli House tonight.

Sheik Shady Al-Suleiman, the national president of the Australian National Imams Council, has said in online videos that females will be “hung by the breasts in hell” and that women should not even look at men

He was among a group of religious leaders and prominent Islamic Australians hosted by the PM at an Iftar dinner to mark the holy month of Ramadan at Kirribilli House.

The Australian-born Sheik Shady has previously called on God to help “destroy the enemies of Islam” and for adulterers to be stoned to death.

Among the guests at the dinner included Gold Logie winner Waleed Aly and wife Susan Carland, head of the Australian Multicultural Foundation Hass Dellal, Archbishop of Sydney, Reverend Glenn Davies and Richmond footballer Bachar Houli.

In online videos Shiek Shady has called for the killing of women who engage in premarital sex: “Remember that if there is an Islamic state the punishment of zina [sex outside marriage], the punishment of those who commit zina, if they have never been married before, they will be lashed 100 lashes,” he says.


Here's the follower of Muhammad on women (uncovered meat to TomCat Muslim good ole boys) - women will burn in the fires of hell


Here's freaky-weirdo on women who get raped out of wedlock.

Response to the Kuffirs hey - well weirdo orange beard freak-show has the full support of the Grand Mufti of Australia too.

Grand Mufti "Sheik Shady a victim of media-terrorism" - challenges PM's condemnation of "religious ruling" on gays


Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.55.39 am

The Prime Minister says it was a mistake to invite the Shady Sheik to Kirribilli House and condemns the Sheik's teaching on gays.  

Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 12.06.04 pm

but the Shady Sheik's views are the views of Islam.   He is supported by the Grand Mufti and the national council of Imams.

Malcolm's mistake wasn't inviting a Shady Sheik.  The PM's difficulties arise from endorsing Islam, the same Islam the Sheik represents.

The Facebook pages of the council of Imams and the Grand Mufti are like a parallel Australia with Arab and Islamic culture, norms and morality.

Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.48.37 amScreen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.51.55 am

The Grand Mufti has now trapped the Prime Minister by publishing an open letter which is now going viral through the web.

The Grand Mufti of the Muslims of Australia doesn't just endorse his colleague - he goes much further.   He says the Shady Sheik is a victim of a type of terrorism.

Well one of the first cabs out of that rank was none other than the Prime Minister.  

Australia's PM condemns the Sheik and says his views and teaching on gays have no place in Australia.  The Grand Mufti supports him and says he is a victim of terrorism.

The challenge has been laid down PM.   The Grand Mufti has made move, the next move is yours.

Say nothing and you will tell us all we need to know.

Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.46.43 am  Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.47.15 am
Screen Shot 2016-06-30 at 11.47.34 am


Kenneally Claim - #4 -  DOob0BnW0AAKb9CIf we are going on a body count the Catholic clergy has done more harm to more Australians than extremist Muslims. More than 4,000 reports of sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic church made to the royal commission. God knows how many more are unreported.

Kristina, you should know your colleague Ms Gillard excluded Islam from the terms of reference of the child abuse royal commission.

And you should get your facts straight too before lining up the fashionable-to-line-up Catholic clergy - Ms Keneally's diatribe carries this erratum notice:

This article was amended on 28 February 2017 to reflect the fact that not all the 4,000 allegations of incidents of abuse were against Catholic clergy. Thirty-four per cent were said to involve lay people and religious sisters.



Child abuse Royal Commission ignores abused girls. If they're Muslim.

The Letters Patent establishing the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Abuse tell us that "all children deserve a safe and happy childhood".

To help achieve that end, the Commission is directed to inquire into:

what institutions and governments should do to better protect children against child sexual abuse and related matters in institutional contexts in the future;

what institutions and governments should do to...encourage reporting of......child sexual abuse and related matters in institutional contexts;

what should be done to eliminate or reduce impediments... for responding to child sexual abuse and related matters in institutional contexts

Last year the Commission released its interim report - here's the Commission's announcement:

About the Interim Report

Volume 1 outlines why we are here, what we have done, what we're learning and what we need to do next. 

Volume 2 includes the personal stories of 150 people who shared their experience of abuse. They have been chosen as a representative group and all names and other identifying features have been changed. 

Here are some word counts from the two volumes:

  • Catholic - 159 
  • Anglican - 54
  • Church - 327
  • Priest - 193 
  • Salvation Army - 52
  • Christian - 63
  • Marist - 15
  • Brother - 383
  • Muslim - zero
  • Islam - zero
  • Child-bride - zero
  • genital mutilation - zero

The Commission's broader website yields similar results -  the words Muslim, Islam, child-bride or genital-mutilation simply don't appear.   It's hard to argue that 327 mentions of "Church" against zero mentions of "Islam" accurately reflects institutional involvement in child-abuse in Australia.

The Australian case of Madley v Madley (pseudonyms) was brought by a 16 year old girl who wanted to prevent her parents from sending her to a Middle Eastern country for a forced, underaged marriage.   In granting her application, the Magistrate said:

  • The application is one that is becoming increasingly common both before this Court and the Family Court.
  • .......this young person’s parents have made arrangements for her to marry a person whom she has met on one occasion. The wedding has been planned to take place in a little under two weeks time and would involve this child flying from Australia to a non Hague convention middle eastern country for the purpose of that marriage occurring. 

In 2013 the National Children's and Youth Law Centre produced a report on forced child marriages.   It surveyed Australian government and non-government agencies working with children.   Of 91 respondents, 50 had encountered children at risk of forced marriage in the past 24 months.   Underage marriages are against the law.   It's child abuse.   It's a big and growing problem.   But our Royal Commission seems unaware of it.

The 2011 Census recorded more than 3,000 married or de-facto underage teens in Australia.  Here's the Daily Telegraph's report on the numbers for NSW.

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 1.43.06 am

Here's a report from the ABC dated 2 December 2014.

Nine-year-old suspected child bride leaves Australia to be married, Immigrant Women's Health Service says

A nine-year-old Sydney girl has allegedly left the country to be married overseas, just one of a dozen cases since June, a women's health service says.

The Immigrant Women's Health Service in western Sydney said it received a tip-off on Monday about a case involving a nine-year-old child bride.

The service spoke to the girl's mother but said it could not get specific information. It is suspected the girl will be married in the Middle East.

Government's response was a new "safety plan" with pamphlets, posters and the like.

Screen Shot 2015-02-26 at 2.37.20 am

Here's the reaction from a working professional in the area:

But Dr Eman Sharobeem, director of the Immigrant Women's Health Service, said the strategy would not work because girls were too scared to implicate their families.

"Forced marriage and child brides happen among the culturally and linguistically diverse communities, those communities will not go to the website and will not share glossy papers to see what's written about legislation in the country," she said.

"I don't hope and wish to see parents behind bars ... I already tried with many of them to talk about informing the authorities, and as soon as I put that on the table the girls actually turn their back and say 'we're not even going to have a conversation with you'."

Instead Dr Sharobeem said the Government's new strategy needed to put more resources towards grassroots education campaigns and to teach girls how to speak to their families.

"'Teach us how to talk to our parents, because our own mother wants to send us to a man we don't know', are some of the words I heard from these girls," Dr Sharobeem said.

"It breaks my heart to see that we're trying our best to save lives and yet the Government is printing glossy paper."

It breaks my heart too.   We have a Royal Commission inquiring into the way Institutions respond to child abuse.  An institution includes a religion, and we seem to be zealously inquiring into the Christian churches and their practices dating to the 1950s.   How about a bit of focus on a clear and present danger to children which shows no sign of abating into the future?

In the same way as it has exhaustively examined the practices of the Catholic Church, this Royal Commission must examine the Koran, Hadith and Shura, along with Islamist preaching. The Royal Commission will have failed us if it continues to ignore these crimes against children.


Good on you for being nice Kristina.  You'd be a lovely neighbour.  But please, stay out of politics and public niceness, it's just too dangerous for the rest of us when you're there.

Here's Kristina's original piece from The Guardian, published 27 February this year.




There is zero chance that sharia law – as a repressive criminal code used in certain Muslim majority nations – is going to be enshrined in Australia. Zero.

It seems ridiculous that this sentence even needs to be written. But the spat between Senator Jacqui Lambie and TV presenter Yassmin Abdel-Magied on Q&A recently, and the brouhaha that has followed, suggests that it does.

Think of the Australian institutions that would need to completely collapse to make this ridiculous idea a reality: federal parliament, state parliaments, the constitution, the courts, a free press, the rule of law, the defence forces, democracy itself.

Who knew Australian democracy was so weak that a young Muslim woman talking about her faith on national television might be its downfall? She’s obviously infiltrating within, working for the ABC and being sent on goodwill tours by the department of foreign affairs and trade. The outrage machine cranked itself to fever pitch, seeking to destroy Abdel-Magied’s credibility, reputation, and her professional livelihood.

A word about sharia. I’m no Muslim scholar but I do understand that there is a difference between sharia as a personal ethics code and sharia law as used by repressive governments and certain Islamic sects as a cruel tool of control.

I am relaxed about the former. For generations Muslims have lived in western countries practising sharia and obeying the laws of the land. Thousands of Muslims live in Australia doing exactly this. Carry on, my fellow citizens. Pray five times a day if you want, and don’t mind me when I refrain from meat on Fridays during Lent – it’s just a Catholic thing I do. Don’t worry, I’m not expecting you to do it too.


I also know that our fellow Islamic citizens in Australia overwhelmingly join me and the rest of us in condemning sharia as an oppressive, archaic, harsh and undemocratic code of law when it is used by extremist groups and governments to terrorise and control Muslim people – especially Muslim women – in some Muslim majority nations.

I don’t know Yassmin Abdel-Magied but I know what it is like to try to explain why you are a feminist and a member of a patriarchal religion. It is to invite scorn and derision from some quarters.

I am a Catholic scholar. I am a feminist. I can make a strong case that Jesus was a feminist while the Catholic church is a sexist organisation greatly influenced by the patriarchal Roman empire. But it would take a lot of careful and thoughtful discussion, the kind of conversation that doesn’t make great television. Some people would mock.

Abdel-Magied was trying to make a similar point about Islam, the prophet Muhammad and subsequent patriarchal interpretations of the Koran. Maybe she was naive to think the “reality show” that Q&A has descended into was the best place to use phrases like “Islam is the most feminist of all religions” and “There is a difference between religion and culture.” Sentences like that need to be placed in context, unpacked for nuance.

Unfortunately context and nuance are not big features of conversation inside the outrage machine, but double standards are rife.

It seems that every Australian Muslim who pokes their head up in public is expected to own, explain and condemn any terrorist act carried out by any extremist Muslim anywhere in the world. The outrage machine demands it, and then that same machine judges if the words are sufficient.

Why isn’t this same outrage applied to Australian Catholics? If we are going on a body count the Catholic clergy has done more harm to more Australians than extremist Muslims. More than 4,000 reports of sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic church made to the royal commission. God knows how many more are unreported. Innocent Australian children and young people are the victims. Lives have been ruined: suicides and mental illness, broken families, grotesque physical injury.

Why isn’t the outrage machine demanding the Catholic prime minister condemn this horrendous and sustained attack on Australians every time the commission hears from another victim of Catholic abuse? 

Why aren’t they regularly calling for the Catholic deputy prime minister to speak out and make clear he does not condone what some Catholic clergy have done?

Why aren’t they asking the Catholic-raised leader of the opposition about whether Cardinal George Pell should face questions in Australia? Oh, wait, the leader of the opposition said in parliament two weeks ago that Cardinal Pell should be sent back to Australia to face questions. Why didn’t the outrage machine join that bandwagon?

Why aren’t they demanding the government urgently implement a national redress scheme to make reparations to the Catholic church’s victims?

Or is taking on Australian Catholics hitting just a little too close to home?

It’s easier, isn’t it, to pick on the young woman with the scarf on her head, or get upset about two little girls in a hijab, all in the name of making Australia safe.

What brave defenders of freedom, of Australia, you are.