Muslim leaders ‘denounce’ anti-terror laws


Calm and measured response

Calm and measured response, as usual

Of course they do! How can they spread Islam in Australia and other non-Muslim countries with pesky laws designed to foil the necessary violence and intimidation, and which put ‘man-made law’ above sharia?

And why would they ever support anything done by this kafir government anyway? Don’t forget, non-Muslims are the ‘worst of beasts‘, so the last thing any self-respecting Muslim leader would do is be seen agreeing with the infidels.

But, in the spirit of coexistence (little joke there…), let’s see what the various Sheiks and Imams have to say:

1. These laws clearly target Muslims and they do so unjustly. Whilst the language of the law is neutral, it is no secret that in practice these laws specifically target Muslims. Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s commentary in selling these laws also makes this clear.

Why do you think that might be? Go on, have a guess!

2. The primary basis of these laws is a trumped up ‘threat’ from ‘radicalised’ Muslims returning from Iraq or Syria. There is no solid evidence to substantiate this threat. Rather, racist caricatures of Muslims as backwards, prone to violence and inherently problematic are being exploited. It is instructive that similar issues about Australian troops travelling abroad to fight or Jews travelling to train or fight with the Israeli Defence Force are simply never raised.

OK, let me just digest that for a minute, because my brain has just blown a number of tiny fuses. As the attorney general stated, two-thirds of those Muslims who returned from Afghanistan were later found to be involved in home-grown terror plots. And you think that those returning from the barbarism of the Islamic State would all come home and open florist shops? Do me a favour.

The caricature is all yours. What race is Islam again?

And in your view the armed forces of democratic states (like Australia or Israel) are just the same as IS terrorists? Is there any point in going on?

3. These proposals come in the same style as those which have preceded since the Howard era. An alleged threat is blown out of all proportion as the pretext, further ‘tightening’ of the laws is claimed necessary and rushed through, without proper national debate or community consultation [translation: without giving Muslims the right to veto it] The reality of the alleged threat is also exposed by the lack of correspondence between the official ‘terror threat’ level, which has remained the same since 2001, and the hysterical rhetoric from government ministers.

Probably not a good idea to use the word “blown” relating to anything Islamic – just sayin’. Muslims are in every way superior to infidels, so the starting point is that anything done by the kafir has to be ok-ed by Muslims. Unfortunately, Western democracies don’t work like that. We don’t consult with other minority religious or immigrant groups on matters of national security. You’re lucky you got a face-to-face with the PM… oh, wait, that’s right, you turned it down.

4. The Muslim community is being asked to sign off on laws and policies that have already been decided. Prime Minister Tony Abbott is merely seeking approval under the cover of consultation. He seeks that the Muslim community be on board because the policy entails the community policing itself. We refuse to provide such a rubber stamp on what is an unjust and hypocritical policy.

In your dreams! To expect the government of a democratic state such as Australia to obtain ‘sign off’ from the biggest security threat we face? Fox, chickens etc.

We also reject government attempts to divide the Muslim community into ‘radicals’ and ‘moderates’ and to use the community for its agenda.

That’s right, because there is no difference. Islam is Islam is Islam. There is no moderate Islam. Are you therefore saying that every Muslim is a dormant radical just waiting to be activated by some offensive event? Like an infidel being in front of you in the queue at Woolies?

5. As Muslims, we are as concerned about peace and security for all [Muslims?] as anyone else. At the same time, we are not naïve. We are not fooled by those who speak against violence and terrorism but are its proponents at an institutional level through military and foreign policies. We are not fooled by those who speak of peace but maintain cordial ties with dictatorial regimes abroad [translation: Israel] and who support and justify the most heinous of violence inflicted on innocent people as seen recently in Gaza.

Like firing rockets at civilians from schools and hotels? I give up. There is no way to reason with this kind of bizarre moral relativism.

It is time for the wider community to take stock and properly debate these matters, instead of continually being misled by the politicians and their fearmongering.

Translation: stop telling the truth about Islam.

If matters continue as they are, we all stand to lose.

Translation: you stand to lose, infidel.

Note that there is not one, single conciliatory statement in the entire release. Not one. Nothing. Just endless complaining.

It’s time for this country and this government to move on and deal with this issue, and if it’s without the support of ‘Muslim leaders’ then so be it.

Comments

  1. Simon Colwell says:

    Deport the lot of them. If a surgeon finds a cancer in your body he removes all of it, he doesn’t leave behind any parts that appear to be benign as it may come back to harm you later.

    Like

  2. Don’t we already rules that ammount to Conspiracy to commit crime and simple stuff like, you know?… You’re not allowed to kill people? Why do we need more godamn laws that restrict law abiding and moral people? Why? We already have laws that say “Don’t hurt anyone and leave their Sh^&%t alone”! This is just another power grab by a power hungry system!

    Like

  3. Sean McHugh says:

    Yep, typical dog-ugly picture. Rather comical, in fact. The trouble is, their insane raging faces leave little room for cartoonists to do their caricatures.

    Like

  4. thingadonta says:

    All the more reason for the anti terror laws.

    Like

  5. Slightly ironic regarding Brandis giving 30 minutes to review legislation… being undemocratic and unjust by providing nowhere near enough time to read important legislation that affects everyone, all in the name of providing security. Terrorist events take away freedom for a small area in that instance – yet “anti-terror” laws take freedoms from everyone for ever. – You do not get security by taking away freedoms. It never works. Read a history book.

    Like

Trackbacks

  1. […] Muslim leaders ‘denounce’ anti-terror laws […]

    Like

%d bloggers like this: