Winds of Jihad

Barney Zwartz / Sydney Morning Herald
February 16, 2007

*
LIFE can become untenable when the Muslim population of a non-Muslim country reaches about 10 per cent, as shown by France, a Jewish expert on Islam says.

The Australian Jewish News yesterday quoted Raphael Israeli as saying Australia should cap Muslim immigration or risk being swamped by Indonesians.

Professor Israeli told the Herald that was a misunderstanding. But he said: “When the Muslim population gets to a critical mass you have problems. That is a general rule, so if it applies everywhere it applies in Australia.”

Professor Israeli, an expert on Islamic history from Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has been brought to Australia by the Shalom Institute of the University of NSW. The Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Council is co-hosting many of his activities.

He said Muslim immigrants had a reputation for manipulating the values of Western countries, taking advantage of their hospitality and tolerance.

“Greeks or Italians or Jews don’t use violence. There is no Italian or Jewish Hilaly [a reference to the controversial cleric Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly of Lakemba mosque]. Why?”

Professor Israeli said that when the Muslim population increased, so did the risk of violence.

“Where there are large Muslim populations who are prepared to use violence you are in trouble. If there is only 1 or 2 per cent they don’t dare to do it – they don’t have the backing of big communities. They know they are drowned in the environment of non-Muslims and are better behaved.”

In Australia, Muslims account for about 1.5 per cent of the population.

Professor Israeli said that in France, which has the highest proportion of Muslims in Europe at about 10 per cent, it was already too late. There were regions even the police were scared to enter, and militant Muslims were changing the country’s political, economic and cultural fabric, and demanding anti-Semitic and anti-Israel policies.

“French people say they are strangers in their own country. This is a point of no return.

“If you are on a collision course, what can you do? You can’t put them all in prison, and anyway they are not all violent. You can’t send them all back. You are really in trouble. It’s irreversible.”

Professor Israeli said that in Australia a few imams had preached violence. “You should not let fundamentalist imams come here. Screen them 1000 times before they are admitted, and after they are admitted screen what they say in the mosque.”

He said some Muslims wanted to impose sharia (Islamic law) in their adopted countries, and when propaganda did not work they turned to intimidation.

Professor Israeli said his task was to describe, not prescribe. He also said his warning did not include immigrants, including Muslims, who simply wanted to improve their lot. As long as they respected the law and democracy, their numbers — Buddhist, Muslim or Jew — were immaterial. It became material when a group accepted violence.

“The trains in London and Madrid were not blown up by Christians or Buddhists but by Muslims, so it is them we have to beware,” he said.

Keysar Trad, of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, said “Not only religious clerics need to be screened before entering Ausralia but also academics … this type of academic does nothing but create hatred, suspicion and division … We should review not only what the man has said but also those who have sponsored him, to see if they endorse those comments.”

*

Robert Spencer from JW on Keyzar Trad:

“True to form, deals with none of the substance of what Israeli said, and offers no alternative vision…”

*

Sheik yer’mami sez:

Keyzar Trad is a long time supporter of the global jihad and a disciple of the grand master Bin Laden himself.
On what pretenses did he enter Australia? Like Hilali, the ‘catmeat’ sheik, he should have never been allowed to put his feet on the ground here.

His own history of spreading hatred is manifested in his own writing:

Keysar on Australians:-

“The criminal dregs of white society colonised this country, and now, they only take the select choice of other societies, and the descendants of these criminal dregs tell us that they are better than us. And because we are not elitists, we tolerate them…”

You see, they are 1.5 % of the population and they (still) ‘tolerate’ us…

I will post Hugh Fitzgerald’s take on this in the comments section!

‘War is deceit..’- said Mohammed, and we are being deceived. Because we abide by humanitarian standards, the enemy has none. Because ‘we want to be ‘better than them’- but they commit the worst atrocities and hide behind women & children, and they are winning. They accuse us of every crime ever committed, and it is them who are the genocidal zombies. This we call ‘projection’- accusing the accuser. But our elected leaders always fall for it, why? Are we unable to learn?

“Mahdi army commanders withdraw to Iran to lie low during security crackdown,” by Michael Howard for The Guardian:

Senior commanders of the Mahdi army, the militia loyal to the radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr, have been spirited away to Iran to avoid being targeted in the new security push in Baghdad, a high-level Iraqi official told the Guardian yesterday.
Here’s the link from Jihadwatch:

What looked very promising at the beginning seems to fizzle out:

Hérouxville drops some rules from controversial code

Last Updated: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 |
CBC News
The town council in Hérouxville amended its provocative immigrant code of conduct Monday night to remove certain rules.

Council adopted the changes, which include removing references to “no stoning of women in public” and “no female circumcision.”

Councillors said the rules were open to misinterpretation by journalists who have flocked to the Mauricie town of 1,200 since it adopted the code of conduct in January.

Read it all…

Here’s an update:

Looks like Herouxville didn’t cave in after all:

Herouxville Wins: One group of People Can Make a Difference in Canada.

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=921413

A ground swell of support by Quebecers over reasonable accommodation by those who wish to impose their views on La Belle Province has changed Quebec as a force to be reckoned with forever, with the introduction of a New Quebec Immigration Bill, introduced by the Quebec Provincial Government in October 2008.

Many have said, one person or group of individuals cannot make a difference in the World.

The small town of Herouxville and it’s citizens have proved the World Wrong!

It is a hard fought day for all people who feel Right Makes Right, regardless of what those who wish to change the cultural landscape of Quebec to suit their self perceived political gain or media opinion to sell newspapers.

Other provinces across Canada, as well as citizens, politicians and media from all over the world took notice when in 2006 Herouxville “Dare State the Obvious. “Reasonable Accommodation” was not Reasonable at all when it is “complicit” in “losing our Cultural Identity,Customs, Language and National Identity as Canadians.”

For 400 years, We fought and died for those rights, and do not wish them to be taken away by anyone! Not now or ever!

Time will tell if other Provinces and Countries will take a cue from Herouxville’s “Motto” … When in Rome…. You are Roman……Our Laws, Our Culture, Our Country,

If you wish to immigrate here,and live amongst us,then all are welcome, just do not try and change us, for we are Quebecois, We are Canadian, we are a country of two languages French and English.

No Canadian would ever think of changing your customs, religion, language or laws if we chose to immigrate to your country. Again, When in Rome….Live as a Roman.

Either Love us, or Leave us, the Choice is yours.

“Immigration” to any country is a “Privilege, not a Right!” “Please Remember that!”

Herouxville wins

And that’s a good thing

National Post Published: Friday, October 31, 2008

So it becomes official: The tiny town of Herouxville has won the great argument over “reasonable accommodation” of immigrants to Quebec.

In 2007, Herouxville’s municipal council passed an official code of “life standards” designed to advise new Quebecers (though there were none in town yet) of the province’s culture norms. We do not, the code said, practise polygamy, separation by caste, sex discrimination or segregation or honour killing. Although it is a secular society, Quebec does observe traditional Christian holidays and has buildings and streets named after great Christian figures. Boys and girls play together in our parks and public facilities, and your doctor or lawyer or MP might be a woman. Get used to it.

Herouxville’s code is rambling, deliberately provocative and in parts just plain weird. But what mostly made it controversial — in this culturally relativistic age — was the core idea that Quebecers had the right to consciously impose any cultural expectations at all upon immigrants. And that idea has now been taken up by the government of Quebec, which announced Wednesday that it will require newcomers to sign a declaration promising to participate in the “shared values” of the Quebecois people.

The province’s neo-Herouxvillian document is simpler and much less objectionable than the original model — but it surely never would have been adopted in the first place if the little community hadn’t thrown down the gauntlet. From now on, immigrants entering Quebec will have to indicate their understanding and agreement that Quebec is a pluralist, liberal-democratic society where French is the official language, the sexes are equal, church and state are separate and secular law takes precedence over religion, though everyone is free to observe his own faith.

If a sign of liberalism’s lamentable journey from egalitarian origins to cheap identity politics were needed, one could find none better than the frantic race to object to this motherhood statement of what ought to be liberal fundamentals. The editorial board of the Montreal Gazette, for instance, complains that the declaration is unenforceable, and yet at the same time is “somehow repellent” in its explicitness and clarity and yet again is too “slippery” in its meaning to be of any good.

Elsewhere, we read of the declaration being denounced as a pre-election “political stunt”; this, of course, is what you call a very popular measure when you don’t personally like it. Would it be much of a “stunt” if it weren’t near-certain to win votes?

Other measures were announced along with the declaration: The province plans to expand French-language education for prospective immigrants, and language-training funding is also to be made available to Quebec employers who hire newcomers. Nobody described these expensive measures as “political stunts,” and some critics ignored them completely; only the culturally assertive, low-cost idea of advising immigrants how to integrate was singled out.

Perhaps most extraordinary was the quote from sociologist Victor Armony, in our own pages, to the effect that successful immigrants “don’t need Quebec society to patronize them.” But as we see it, the far more patronizing slight comes from doctrinaire multiculturalism, which refuses to recognize the reality that immigrants are real people with real values — not human props in a feel-good ethnic fun fair — and that oftentimes those values are in conflict with Canada’s, especially as regards women, gays and the place of religion in our society. Quebec’s government, like Herouxville, at least pays immigrants the respect of recognizing the hard edges on their worldviews, even as it asks them to bend them as the price of integrating into their new homeland.

That’s a fair price — one that millions of Canadian immigrants have paid since the birth of this country. We see nothing wrong with the Quebec government making this trade-off explicit. Indeed, we urge other governments to follow its example.

You don’t EVER see them cry for the victims, those suckers for crim’s and terrorists!

Everything else would be ‘racism’- right? Right.

*

Vitriolic e-mails zero in on ‘Muslim’
By Elaine Jarvik and Deborah Bulkeley
Deseret Morning News

*
On ultraconservative Web sites like littlegreenfootballs.com, the story of Monday’s shooting rampage at Trolley Square has been reduced to one fact: “Salt Lake City Killer Was a Muslim.”

*’Ultraconservative’ translated: = “bigoted, racist, evil.”

*
“The media did everything they could to avoid mentioning it, but it’s confirmed today that the mass murderer who terrorized a mall in Salt Lake City was a Bosnian Muslim,” reads the intro at littlegreenfootballs.com.

*

* Because even if the guy’s got ‘Al Qaeda’ written all over him the authorities usually deny it…

*
At MichaelSavage.com, the Muslim connection is a running-banner headline.

*
At jihadwatch.org, the story begins “Sudden Jihad syndrome? Maybe.”
The online stories, as well as Tuesday’s and Wednesday’s stories in the Deseret Morning News, have resulted in a barrage of vitriolic e-mails to the News from people either angry at the paper for not mentioning the religion of shooter Sulejman Talovic in Wednesday’s Web edition, or certain that because Talovic is Muslim that he must be a terrorist.

*

Here’s the correct Jihadwatch article:

*

Update:

*

He was a ‘good boy:’

Salt Lake City Killer’s Records Released
Local Salt Lake City blogger Jonathan notified us that some of Sulejman Talovic’s juvenile records have been leaked. Excerpts:

At age 12, Talovic was before a judge for allegedly holding a knife over the head of girl while stating, “I’ll kill you,” according to a source who is familiar with the case.

Two years earlier, Talovic was referred to juvenile court for throwing rocks at a little girl.

About the same time, he threatened his parents’ landlord with a knife. …

The first girl was not struck by the stones. And the mother of the second girl snatched her up in the nick of time, just as Talovic took a swipe with the blade, according to the source, who has seen court documents relating to the case. …

Talovic was also referred to court for stealing fireworks from a Smith’s grocery store on June 22, 2001.

On July 9, 2001, Talovic admitted the shoplifting crime, and it was the last time he appeared in juvenile court, according to the source, quoting court records.

* Its getting better by the day…

*
US asks Lashkar-e taibah founder’s brother to leave
22 Jan, 2007

SMS NEWS to 8888 for latest updates

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: The brother of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) founder Hafiz Mohammed Sayeed is among 30 Muslim clergymen who head mosques in the United States and have been asked to leave for violating visa rules.

* Don’t be surprised that this turd relays on Christians and Jews to help him stay:

Center leader faces deportation

Imam Muhammad Masood has been asked to leave his residence on the premises of the Sharon Mosque, headquarters of the Islamic Centre of New England.

No date has been fixed for his departure. It would be sometime soon, The Daily Times quoted attorney George Garfinkle as saying in a report from Washington.

Apparently keen to curb their activities and see them leave as part of the current policy of the Department of Homeland Security, the US wants to ensure that correct procedures are followed.

The government is leaning on them, and they’re trying to do the right thing legally, Garfinkle told the newspaper Patriot Ledger .

Garfinkle also confirmed that some former Islamic Centre board members had been called before a federal grand jury in Boston, Massachusetts, over the past month in connection with the investigation of Imam Masood’s alleged visa violations. He did not identify who was called.

Masood is expected to have a visa hearing within the next few months. He could be deported at that time, the report further added.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement picked up Masood, his son Hassan and a Chelmsford imam on November 15 as part of a multi-state sweep of 33, mostly Pakistani, immigrants.

Most of those in other states were charged with having fraudulent religious-worker visas.

Masood has led the Sharon mosque since 1998. He and his family have continued to live on the mosque property since his release on bail, but he hasn’t led prayer services or performed other duties since then.

His brother Sayeed dissociated himself from LeT after it was banned in Pakistan. He went on to found Markaz Dawaatul Irshad and Jammatud Daawa which he insists are charity groups.

* Any Islamic ‘charity group’ is a terrorist organization. Prove me wrong!