I reckon they would like to roll back that clock.
Si Hoc Legere Scis Nimium Eruditionis Habes
To those in Western democracies, these accommodating actions appear, on the surface, to be little more than harmless civil gestures, respecting the needs of a growing religion in their midst and welcoming a new addition to their proud, multicultural tradition. Many Westerners pat themselves on the back for their liberal bent, their tolerance and their open-mindedness.
Little do they realize that this strategic pattern of demands is part of an insidious, 1,400-year-old proscription for Muslims that originates in the Koran and the Sunnah, the deeds of Mohammed. It is the Hijra or doctrine of immigration. Modeled by Mohammed's migration from Mecca to Medina, this immigration is not to a romanticized melting pot wherein newcomers gratefully search for opportunities for a better life in liberty and freely offer their talents and loyalty to benefit their new homeland. This is immigration for Islamic expansionism employing ethnic separatism to gain special status and privileges within the host country. Hijra is immigration designed to subvert and subdue non-Muslim societies and pave the way for eventual, total Islamization.
In their compelling book, "Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration," authors Sam Solomon, a former professor of shari'ah law and convert to Christianity, and Elias Al Maqdisi, an expert on Islamic teachings, explain the migration of Muslims to the Dar-al-Harb, the "land of war," as a religious edict with a basis in Islamic doctrine. They delineate the step-by-step process of this 1,400-year-old strategy of conquest. It is a transitional strategy which they characterize as the most important step in spreading Islam and preparing for jihad. From their carefully delineated treatise on Hijra, it is clear that migration in concert with military conquest comprise the bookends of Islamic expansionism.
Solomon and Al Maqdisi review the phases of the Hijra and its juristic or legal basis in Islamic doctrine. Under the cover of taquiya or deception, the step-by-step methodology of the migration process is designed to subdue, then, subjugate the host culture, culminating in implementation of shari'ah law.
I am very sceptical of immigration of all religious people into the country but you guys should stick with zombie apocalypse or economic meltdown because magical Islamic takeover 2030 isn't on the horizon as long as the country can maintain relative levels of the different faiths and remain, over all, secular.
The motto they follow - Kill all non-believers, they are infidels. They don't worship Allah or respect Mohammed, the last prophet.
Sorry, but why should we be allowing people into this country who don't abide by or respect our law and want to install their own law (Sharia Law)?
Does that bare any relevance on me freely having travelled Malaysia, Indonesia, Egypt, Turkey, etc. No. Does it say anything about the numerous people from different walks of life I've seen able to assimilate into this country? No.
Yeah all the Muslims follow that. Its why there are no white people in Lebanon or Western journalists in Saudi Arabia... oh wait, there are, I guess Muslims aren't like zombies in that regard.The motto they follow - Kill all non-believers, they are infidels. They don't worship Allah or respect Mohammed, the last prophet.
You mean like the Brethren or any other number of creepy little sects? The major religions we already have which invariably have lots of fundamentalists? I agree - immigration is an on-going and evolving process but Sharia law and death by population infiltration is the realm of the ****ing idiot. Australia is not South London.Sorry, but why should we be allowing people into this country who don't abide by or respect our law and want to install their own law (Sharia Law)?
Al Qaeda has called on its followers to unleash massive bushfires this summer in Australia....
Is this what we want for Australia?
But let's put aside all that talk about Western democracies getting overtaken by Muslims and Sharia law etc.
What I want to know (given the train of your comments) is what's inside your head. Let me accept firstly that you are not an extremist, that you are a reasonable person ("moderate", if you like) of the Muslim faith.
Do you condemn, utterly and without reservation, the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and Bali, Madrid, London? Do you condemn any future acts of terrorism, by anyone, in the name of any religion?
The next trick the extremist's are using is inserting bomb's internally into the body so far they have inserted one bomb which went of prematurely the bad news is they are hard to detect.
The other ones to watch are the Fed who lie and create stories like the Cole affair or the fishing trawler supposedly fired one US war ship's into start the Vietnam war.
Wars so the higher up in the feds can keep their power and life style.
Both are bad news and we are in the middle.
How's this for stupidity, this in effect sets a precedent that someone can avoid the way law is upheld in Australia on religious grounds
http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/...y-trial-in-nswMuslim man granted judge-only trial in NSW
A Muslim man was granted a judge-only trial in NSW on the grounds a jury may be biased because of his strict religious beliefs.
Ismail Belghar, 36, is believed to be the first Muslim in Australia to be granted the special trial, the Daily Telegraph reports.
The decision by Judge Ronald Solomon was revealed in the NSW District Court yesterday after Belghar pleaded guilty to detaining and assaulting his sister-in-law because she had "dared" to take his wife to the beach without asking him first.
He had initially been charged with attempted murder
Bench only trials are quite common. I really don't see the difference between a judge or jury deciding if someone is guilty.