Aussie IS fighters could be hanged…

…or executed by firing squad, in which case we should charge their families for the bullets and the disposal of the cadaver.

Some links from the Q-Society:

Aussie IS fighters could be hanged… (should be hanged!)

AUSTRALIANS captured fighting for the Islamic State in Iraq will be dealt with under Iraqi law, where the penalty for terrorism offences is death by hanging.
The former ALP minister used to be proud of his party because it fought prejudice. Not any longer.
While profoundly unqualified moonbats waffle on about ‘Islamophobia’ a Christian woman who was given the death penalty last year for drinking water from a well reserved for Muslims in Pakistan, has had her appeal against the sentence rejected by the Lahore high court.
Appeal Rejected

Paki Court Upholds Death Sentence Against Christian Woman who Drank from Well Reserved for Muslims…
A Christian woman who was given the death penalty last year for drinking water from a well reserved for Muslims in Pakistan has had her appeal against the sentence rejected by the Lahore high

Treating Islam with special reverence is cultural suicide and just plain wrong

 After we mention “Mohammed” we have to say “Peace be upon him”’- James Delingpole
…. it’s bad enough — as I’ve argued — to teach kids to think that their country’s religious traditions no longer really matter. But what is surely unforgivable is simultaneously to teach those same kids that there is one particular religion which matters so much that even when you don’t subscribe to it you must still treat it with the reverence, fear and awe of those who do.
“Myth-dispelling” Hizbuttnik sees academics withdraw
The Australian National University has defended a decision by several of its academics to withdraw from a public debate on terrorism after they found out a representative of radical Islamic group Hizb ut-Tahrir had also been invited to speak.

Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist and a Fox News contributor, said that the tremendous ideological appeal of the Islamic State terror group, also known as…

2 thoughts on “Aussie IS fighters could be hanged…”


    CRIMES ACT 1914 – SECT 24AA
    (1) A person shall not:

    (a) do any act or thing with intent:

    (i) to overthrow the Constitution of the Commonwealth by revolution or sabotage; or

    (ii) to overthrow by force or violence the established government of the Commonwealth, of a State or of a proclaimed country; or

    (b) within the Commonwealth or a Territory not forming part of the Commonwealth:

    (i) levy war, or do any act preparatory to levying war, against a proclaimed country;

    (ii) assist by any means whatever, with intent to assist, a proclaimed enemy of a proclaimed country; or

    (iii) instigate a person to make an armed invasion of a proclaimed country.

    (2) Where a part of the Defence Force is on, or is proceeding to, service outside the Commonwealth and the Territories not forming part of the Commonwealth, a person shall not assist by any means whatever, with intent to assist, any persons:

    (a) against whom that part of the Defence Force, or a force that includes that part of the Defence Force is or is likely to be opposed; and

    (b) who are specified, or included in a class of persons specified, by proclamation to be persons in respect of whom, or a class of persons in respect of which, this subsection applies.

    (3) A person who contravenes a provision of this section shall be guilty of an indictable offence, called treachery.

    Penalty: Imprisonment for life.

  2. Aid And Comfort To The Enemy

    Hugh Fitzgerald
    A declaration of war on the Islamic State is not directed mainly at the Islamic State. Its existence, in the desert of Western Iraq and Eastern Syria, threatens, sensationally more than effectively, the non-Sunnis in Syria, and the Shiites in Iraq. It should be understood, rather, as a resolution that would be politically difficult to oppose, and thart would allow more effective measures taken against those in the United States (and if it is copied, by those elsewhere in the Western world) who support the same goals as the Islamic State, that is the establishment of a caliphate and the imposition, all over the world, of the Holy Law of Islam, that is the Shari’a. And since almost all Muslims are suppposed to support those two goals, and many, whether they declare it or not, certainly support the imposition of the Sharia, they have now been identified, in that support, as giving “aid and comfort” to a declared enemy. And that makes it easier to puruse and prosecute them at home, and makes it easier, too, to deny Muslims entry into this country, on the understanding that it is administratively impossible to distinguish those Muslims who support the imposition of Sharia (including those who with great feigned sincerity tell us that they do not), from those who do not. Since such support is at the heart of Islam, the burden is on Muslims, in any case, to explain to us how it is they could identify themselves as Muslims and not support Shari’a. But just as we attempt to keep out those who are carriers of Ebola, we have every right to keep out those who are carriers of an ideology which, even if it may lay dormant in some Muslims, can still be contagious, and the converts to Islam who suddenly are transformed from marginal, often slightly deranged types, to marginal, often slightly deranged types who are now a danger to all non-Muslims, are ample evidence of the danger. And what Believer, that is Muslim, even in, or perhaps especially in, insisting that “the Islamic State has nothing to do with Islam,” is not giving “aid and comfort” to the enemy?

Comments are closed.