Mustard speech police: Sir Gerard Brennan's talk about sharia “quite out of place”


A former judge speaks up:

Sharia poses problems,  he says.

“No court could apply and no government could administer two parallel systems of law” … former High Court judge Sir Gerard Brennan.

Think anyone would have a problem with that?

You do?

You are right!

The ubiquitous soldier of allah pops up on the scene to whine and complain: “out of place”

Mustard Objects To News

MWD is a dedicated follower of the ABC 1 News Breakfast “Newspapers” segment.   Especially when a commentator just states what should – or should not – be in the news rather than what is the news.

And so it came to pass this morning when Mohammed El-Leissy from the Islamic Council of Australia rocked up to the ABC studio in Southbank.  He expressed interest in a small story on Page 8 of The Australian today titled “Sharia ‘undermines our multiculturalism’” by Nicola Berkovic.  This was the report of the Annual Hal Wooten Lecture delivered by Sir Gerard Brennan, the former Chief Justice of the High Court, at the University of NSW Law School last night.

Sir Gerard is no rabid right-winger and his position that “freedom must be respected and protected, but that does not mean that Islamic sharia law should have the force of law in this country” was both moderate and thoughtful.

However, Mohammed El-Leissy was not impressed.  He told News Breakfast viewers Sir Gerard Brennan’s speech was “simple” and The Australian’s report of his talk “quite out of place”.  Apparently all would have been well if the former Chief Justice’s views had been spiked. That’s the News Breakfast news for today.

 In other news:
Muslims were behind the anti-Jewish bombings in Australia in ’82. Color me shocked.  (Pamela Geller)

“Australia Reopens Probe of 1982 Anti-Israel Bombings” AFP,

Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer are “equating the Palestinian cause with jihad”!

Imagine that!

PufFHO Whitewashes Sharia

The Five Things Every Non-Muslim (and Muslim) Should Know by Qasim Rashid at the HuffPo

CNN Whitewashes Pakistan’s Blasphemy Laws

Do Muslims want shari’a law in Australia?

NO – if you ask MP Maria Vamvakinou, who is the Chair of the federal parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Migration.  The Canberra Times reports that she says many submissions to their recent Inquiry into Multiculturalism criticised Islam and argued against shari’a law.
The Canberra Times says Ms Vamvakinou claimed that it is a ‘myth’ that Muslims want to impose shari’a law in Australia. She said, ”The majority of the Muslim community never asked for Shari’a law and I know they have never sought it.”

YES – if you ask the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils.

They made a submission to the Inquiry calling for shari’a law…
That might not be ‘ALL Muslims’ - but it IS the peak body representing Muslims in Australia!!!
Thankfully, Ms Vamvakinou does say that the Committee has recommended that ‘legal pluralism’ - two sets of laws – should NOT implemented in Australia.
She said, “We do not see the need for the implementation of Shari’a law as part of accommodating cultural sensitivities.”
She also said people should be described by their ‘ethnic group’ – not their religion!
Canberra Times, 20 August, 2012.
The head of a federal inquiry into multiculturalism hopes to push back against the notion that all Muslims in Australia want to impose Shari’a law.

Labor’s Maria Vamvakinou describes this as a myth and a ”fault line” in the community, along with the perception that Muslims do not want to integrate with mainstream Australia.

She also wants migrants to be described by their ethnic origin as opposed to faith, to overcome the trend of grouping all migrants from Afghanistan or Iraq as Muslims.

The Joint Standing Committee on Migration has uncovered wide-spread prejudice against Muslims in its inquiry into multiculturalism.

It is to report to parliament within weeks and comes after the row over the proposed Gungahlin mosque.

Ms Vamvakinou said many of the 500 submissions were against Muslims.

”They range from saying multiculturalism works, down to saying Islam is a problem,” she told The Canberra Times. ”We have identified that it is a perception about Muslim Australians.

”At the final public hearing, we had people saying Islam is a problem and there is a Muslim conspiracy to take over the country and impose Shari’a law.

”The fault line here was the perception that Muslim community can’t and does not want to integrate … a lot of the submissions say that.

”We wanted to debunk some of the myths about multiculturalism, it does not mean Shari’a law in Australia. It’s time we went back to describing people by their ethnic origin as opposed to their faith, we’ve got to change our language.” The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils told the inquiry that Muslims should be allowed to marry, divorce and conduct financial transactions under the principles of Shari’a law.

Then council president Ikebal Patel said all Australians would benefit if Islamic laws were adopted as mainstream legislation but agreed the word sharia could invoke notions of a male-dominated legal code.

Ms Vamvakinou said the committee decided, before the finalisation of its report, that it would not recommend legal pluralism.

”The majority of the Muslim community never asked for Shari’a law and I know they have never sought it,” she said. ”We do not see the need for the implementation of Shari’a law as part of accommodating cultural sensitivities.”

Ms Vamvakinou welcomed the recent formation of the Migration Council of Australia.

The committee is working towards recommending an organisation be established to replace the Bureau of Immigration Research which was abolished by the Howard government.

The committee members were frustrated at the lack of research and collection of data about migrants.

”We recognised there was a gap there, everyone saw this,” Ms Vamvakinou said. ”For example, can someone scientifically explain to me the over-qualified taxi driver syndrome.

”Everybody talks about it, that the taxi drivers have PhDs but they can’t get jobs. If so, what is that costing us?”

Vamvakinou should be reminded that it is not her job to look after mohammedans with phoney PhDs, but her Australian constituents who are becoming increasingly irritated over her shameless Islamo pandering.

2 thoughts on “Mustard speech police: Sir Gerard Brennan's talk about sharia “quite out of place””

  1. He is probably right – any talk about “sharia law” should be had in Isl;amic countries not in Christian democratic countries. Australians cherish their democracy and do not wish to replace it – if this view seems “out of place” perhaps you are.

  2. Ms Vanvakinou seems to think Islam is a democracy and because a majority are not about to go jihading then there is no cause for concern and any concern represents prejudice. No Ms Vanvakuum, it is a theocracy and once the population is large enough the minority who are for jihad will be sizeable enough to go jihading either through terrorism but more likely through intimidation, crying victimhood, lawfare, harassment of filty kaffirs and so one – and the majority know they have to remain silent or they will be the targets too.

Comments are closed.