In 2004, following an official complaint by three members of the Islamic Council of the Australian State of Victoria, Pastors Daniel Nalliah and Daniel Scott were found guilty of religious vilification in breach of the radical, novel, Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.  Scott escaped from Pakistan whilst under threat of murder if he did not convert to Islam, Nalliah spent years in deadly danger in Saudi Arabia.  They had quoted from the Q’ran and other authoritative Islamic texts that repeatedly, consistently, and explicitly advocate the use of coercion and violence to spread Islam. Their audience was a small group of voluntary attenders of an indoor lecture.

The biggest injustice in this case was that the Islamics who incited this open lynching of everything every decent Australian stands for, along with the useful idiots involved — Victorian state Labour government and elements of the judiciary — were not dropped by parachute somewhere in the backwoods of Yemen or Afghanistan.

“If a Government is going to import en mass a culture and religion that has nothing in common with the host nation isn’t it our duty to find out why?”

A very relevant question. It should be on the mind of every Australian. For decades we have been informed of women’s rights, animal’s rights, the importance of the environment, racial tolerance, and being good little world citizens.

Women’s rights? Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Saudi, Iran, Afghanistan – full of carefree females, aren’t they? The women are literally in danger of being shot in some instances – not to mention various other dangers. Their modest clothing puts the western world to shame – until we see it for its true meaning – the garb of suffocation. They dare not so much as look sideways at their lords and masters. According to the writings of their ancient seers, their worth as a witness is half that of a male. Their proportion of the Hell population, according to the Prophet, vastly exceeds that of males. But that is only the feminism angle. The environment, of course – enough said (or, enough sand?) – animal welfare? – that’s where our animals receive the red carpet. Religious and racial tolerance? Nothing from here to the horizon but mosques – excepting the odd black hole, site of a bombed mosque.

Half way between Mein Kampf and, Mad. Just, Mad. “Christianity” – and don’t we know it in our own hearts? – “Christianity” as we attempt to practice it, is not always as it should be. It has not always been as it should have been in the past. St Francis of Assisi was an illustration of the high potential of Christianity. He reportedly joined a crusade, shared his faith before an Islamic leader, and was sent back unharmed to the Christians with a note (so to speak) that here was a christian and perhaps you Christians could take lessons from him!

Western Democracy is capable of going astray. Recently, it has taken to shooting itself in the foot. It has abandoned basic principle – the Law. Islam flows into the vacuum. Historically, Democracy drew on the ideals of Christianity – biblical law, in tandem with grace, forgiveness, the brotherhood of Man. Islam seemingly originated as a pharisaic dream mixed with a faint whiff of Christianity. It is traced back to the darkly superstitious paedophile, Mohammed.  As a fiery creed for war and extermination it fired the minds of various Middle Eastern tribes – some of whom embraced it as a direct replacement of their existing devil worship.    Islam literally means, submission. Where it is heartily and sincerely submission to the God of Creation, like any religion, it can assist in finding that same God. Where it is submission to a warlord’s creed – no prizes for guessing the outcome.



Islamic Utopia

From humble beginnings and through suffering and difficulty Australia has been a stable democracy, a force in the free world.

WIKIPEDIA comment on Section 116, Australian Constitution:      “The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.”

“The proposed inclusion of Section 116 in the Constitution was the subject of some dissent in the 1897 Melbourne Convention and the final convention in 1898. Protestant churches in New South Wales argued that the Constitution should state that divine providence is the “ultimate source of law”, while convention delegates John Quick and Patrick Glynn moved to have God explicitly recognised in the Constitution. The Seventh-day Adventist Church campaigned for a strict separation of church and state, being concerned that the Commonwealth might prohibit its members from working on Sundays. Both sides to some extent achieved their objectives: Section 116 was approved by the final convention, while Glynn successfully moved for the symbolic mention of “Almighty God” in the preamble to the British statute that was to contain the Constitution. The Constitution was then approved by popular referendums in each of the six colonies and took effect on 1 January 1901 (the colonies thus became the states of Australia).”
END Wikipedia extract.

Our Constitution, as any nation’s Constitution, can only be accurately applied by entering first into the mindset under which it was hammered out. .  It is obvious that the relevant mindset embraced rationalism, the Ten Commandments, protection of children, a level of safety and status for females, respect for respectful foreigners even if they are of a different creed, abolition of slavery in its inhumane forms — broadly, the Judeo-Christian view. The world view of our Constitution is at least 75% the antithesis of Mohammed’s.  Our Constitution bans, abhors, wars against and anathematizes the Commonwealth’s making any law for establishing any religion, therefore it is at total war with communism, nazism, and violently enforcement bigoted mindsets. The main object of Section 116 at the time, obviously, was to smooth out possible sectarian problems within what in a broad term might be classified, Christendom. Islam is the stated and sworn enemy of Christendom.  Let us make this clear. Yes, Roman Catholicism remains on paper to this day a sworn enemy of non-Roman Catholicism, but its need to take over the world has thankfully cooled down. A Roman Catholic on paper can believe someone can get to Heaven without being Roman Catholic.  An Islamic on paper and in practical fact if he chooses to remain islamic, must believe no-one outside his so-called religion can attain paradise, and there is no sin, only favour from Allah in deceiving, enslaving, finally, killing an unbeliever. Let’s hope they cool down.

Quoting Mosab Yousef, son of a previous head of Hamas.“What my father saw in those early days was the part of Islam that reflects love and mercy. What he didn’t see, what he perhaps has never yet allowed himself to see, is the other side of Islam. Islamic life is like a ladder, with prayer and praising Allah as the bottom rung. The higher rungs represent helping the poor and needy, establishing schools, and supporting charities. The highest rung is jihad. The ladder is tall. Few look up to see what is at the top. …….. Traditional Muslims stand at the foot of the ladder, living in guilt for not really practising Islam. At the top are fundamentalists, the ones you see in the news killing women and children for the glory of the god of the Qur’an. Moderates are somewhere in between. A moderate Muslim is actually more dangerous than a fundamentalist, however, because he appears to be harmless, and you can never tell when he has taken that next step toward the top. Most suicide bombers began as moderates. The day my father first put his foot on the bottom rung of the ladder, he could never have imagined how far from his original ideals he would eventually climb. And thirty-five years later, I would want to ask him: Do you remember where you started? You saw all those lost people, your heart broke for them, and you wanted them to come to Allah and be safe.  Now suicide bombers and innocent blood?  Is this what you set out to do? But speaking to one’s father about such things is not done in our culture. And so he continued on that dangerous path.” ((Mosab Hassan Yousef, 2010: Son of Hamas (285pp); Tyndale House Publishers Inc., p.11,12.))

Should any cult with these properties, passing itself off as genuine religion, ever be given a moment’s space or credibility in any civilised nation? But isn’t there hope here? If the son of a high ranking terrorist supporter can escape religious fanaticism and find a higher ideal, so can others.

Islam, and comparable mindsets, if taken seriously by adherents, are not personal religions, any more than militant Nazism and Communism. Islam is a forced pattern of outward behaviour, combined with reverence to a proposed God who frowns on people if they do not conform to sanctimonious regulations — and rewards them for despising, deceiving, and even killing those who will not comply. Paradise in Islam’s view is furthered by taking over the world.  Christianity ideally has to do with a loving God who has already provided a sacrifice. Islam and other deceptions (including others linked to Christianity) have to do with an angry God demanding sacrifice. Women tend to be amongst those first called upon to sacrifice; unbelievers and Jews especially are a better sacrifice; Islamic government needs this angry God at the head, to enable a full sacrifice. The only way to interpret S.116 as it was intended is to put it into action.

  1. Immediately, begin a public education program so that the public knows — public education in a limited but effective way regarding Islam, its teachings, its history, its outcomes. Include unbiased recent history of the Middle East, especially the fact that Palestinians of varied ethnicity and personal leanings had first opportunity to set up democracy where Israel now stands. Fanatical islamists destroyed liberal democracy and free thought with the knife, the bullet, and the bomb. The non-Jewish Palestinians proved incapable of governing even themselves – before the few Jews in their midst managed to begin a free state. As Israel fights for democracy today, so Australians will fight for democracy tomorrow, should Islam or any similar pervasive, domineering mindset gain ascendancy. Australians should be informed of the naked facts.
  2. Screen all prospective immigrants with special attention to Islamic background.
  3. Revoke the citizenship of those who obviously deny the oath of allegiance to Australia.
  4. Encourage Islamists to emigrate to a country where they can honestly swear an oath of allegiance.
  5. De-classify Islam and any similar pervasive life-control programs from the status of religion.
  6. Give Australian citizens and Australian institutions complete legal safety should they choose to refuse to give any room or credence to morally nonsensical Islamic beliefs – food preparation, mosques, washing codes, and so on. Note, declining alcohol and being adequately and modestly clothed is not morally nonsensical.
  7. Close down any institution preaching religious racism, religious genocide, paedophilia, woman beating, etc. – as allowed by the Koran and/or practised by Mohammed & others.

Thomas Jefferson could declare that Muslims believe “that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

John Quincy Adams could acknowledge that Muhammad “degraded” the female sex and “declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind.” Winston Churchill could write of Islam, “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.” Pope Callixtus III could assess Islam as “diabolical.”

We might hear it from someone who has ‘been there, done that’, regarding experiencing totalitarianism.      Pastor Danny Nalliah’s experience of Saudi Arabia and Islam

Tacitus claimed, “The more corrupt the State, the more numerous the laws.” When we consider ultra Communism as at times practised in places such as Russia, China, North Korea, etc., — the ultimate corruption — not only can a State tax and punish based on the assumed daily rate at which your hen lays eggs, it can torture and kill depending on what you might inadvertently mumble in your sleep. Then again, under Hitler and Himmler in Germany, if you had any blood relationship whatsoever to a Jew, your destiny was to be a sealed room with a dose of deadly fumigant. Going to the aid of the victims of such monstrosity provided you with the same fate. All done with total legal thoroughness.

In Victoria, Australia, it is done with total legal blindness. Government and government bodies in Australia provide telecommunications, sponsor libraries and other information sources, and permit certain facts to be circulated on the internet. Amongst those facts will be the certified stated views of people such as, for instance, Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams, and Winston Churchill. Also on unrestricted public view will be quotes from the Q’ran etc. regarding how to handle unbelievers. We could look it up if we have a strong enough stomach. (Or we could simply look at history.)

So the Victorian government was working away at inciting hatred by sponsoring publication of everyday certified fact accessible to millions whilst prosecuting, defaming and impoverishing men of God who actually know what they are talking about and are trying to help people who are victims of a cult.  By definition, the Victorian government was duty bound by legislation to find itself guilty of inciting religious hatred – and never a truer conviction would have been made!

As Nalliah himself quipped: Australia is suffering multiCULTuralism.