Why must Islam be presumed innocent?

Andrew Bolt:

Who let them in?

The madness of our refugee and immigration program is today demonstrated by a Bangladeshi asylum seeker now charged with raping a 15-year-old.

How on earth do we let in any alleged “refugee” from Bangladesh, of all places?

AN asylum seeker who came to Australia illegally by boat has been charged for allegedly raping a teenage foster-home girl he held captive for one month.

The girl was only rescued when police found her running “barefoot” down a Western Sydney street at 1.30am yesterday.

It is alleged Bangladeshi national Rashadul Islam, 29, grabbed the girl and attempted to drag her away before the police intervened…

An insider told The Saturday Telegraph that Islam was among the thousands of asylum seekers who arrived ­illegally by boat under the Rudd government.

It is understood he arrived by boat on March 24, 2013.

He was taken off the boat in waters off Christmas Island — along with a number of other asylum seekers — and held in a community detention facility at Phosphate Hill on Christmas Island for two months.

Islam was released on May 15, 2013 and flown to Australia. He was later granted a bridging visa.

Under Labor policy at the time, asylum seekers were permitted ­release into the community without stringent security checks.

Islam must be presumed innocent. But I wonder what Labor’s past immigration ministers can say to the girl?

One thought on “Why must Islam be presumed innocent?”

  1. To criminals, (gangster leftists; muslims etc) ALL criminals must always be presumed innocent until NEVER proven guilty, simply because, they insist, there are no real “crimes” nor “criminals” because we’re all really ever only helpless victims of inevitable forces – to Marxists, of “historical predeterminism” and “society;” mere “products of our environments,” and to their muslim brethren, proudly helpless slaves of “allah!”

    So the only real crime in such a non-compus-mentis fantasy world, is to accuse any other perpetually helpless victim of being a “criminal,” simply because they got caught committing their “crimes” against innocent other helpless victims! You big meanies!

    Besides all that, islam is a “religion” because IT says it is one! And since a “religion” is by definition something “sacred” and beyond mere mortal reproach, it confers on its votaries the perfectly “legal” right to threaten non-members with what in a sane world would otherwise be discerned as hate-speech and death-threats and incitement to violence (all crimes)! Since life is too complex for anyone except a “god” to understand, and cause and effect are forever beyond the comprehension of us mere mortals, all of our “facts” are really only opinions anyway, such that the religious criminals’ unsourced, entirely subjective and completely fact-free opinions are to be treated by law as the diversely opposite equals to those evil atheists’ and rationalists’ silly objective “facts!” So there, NYAH!

    After all, while in the real world, stating an opinion AS a fact would be a form of lying (aka criminal FRAUD) when one gets to back up one’s lies by referring them to a mysterious god, in the eyes of our hidebound and benighted legal traditions, it’s all good and the onus of guilt is reversed so it’s on the people who ask for proof to have to in stead prove the negative – i.e: to prove that god doesn’t really exist and didn’t really say what, for instance, Muhammad said he said! So there, again: NYAH!

Comments are closed.