Indonesians Govt to Send 5,000 Muslims to Australia

 to Obtain Doctorate Degrees, With a Focus on Islamic Studies

Jakarta. The directorate general of Islamic education at the Ministry of Religious Affairs signed a cooperation agreement with the Australian Technology Network of Universities (ATN) to send 5,000 Indonesian students to Australia for their PhD studies, at the Embassy of Australia in Jakarta on Wednesday (10/08).

The director general, Kamaruddin Amin said that the agreement will help university lecturers further their education, especially in the field of Islamic studies.

“The vision is to develop Indonesia into a center for Islamic education, especially being a Muslim majority country,” Kamaruddin said.

He added the program has been backed by the government, with Rp 500 billion ($38.2 million) allocated in the state budget which will be used to fund student scholarships. He also revealed that the program falls in line with the ministry’s plans to build an international Islamic university in 2017 in Sawangan, Depok, West Java.

The scholarships given by the ministry will also be issued to students who wish to undertake other career paths, as ATN believes that a PhD will help Indonesian students venture further in their careers and help develop the country.

According to ATN executive director Renee Hindmarsh, the collaboration will not only strengthen the relationship between Australia and Indonesia, but will also help provide the students access to a world-class education.

“We hope that students who choose to study in one of our member universities will be able to graduate and step into the professional world and be able to create jobs for the future,” Hindmarsh said.

ATN is a consortium consisting of five Australian universities which are Queensland University of Technology (QUT), University of Technology, RMIT University, University of South Australia and Curtin University.

 

 

 

Source

THE AFL is offering 10 “diversity trainee” positions worth $34,000 a year exclusively to Muslim youth

THE AFL is offering 10 “diversity trainee” positions worth $34,000 a year exclusively to Muslim youth as part of a Federal Government-funded program.

To be eligible for the positions, which span a range of areas including social media, administration, finance and marketing, applicants must “be from Muslim background”, and “have recently completed secondary school”.

“Workforce participation is a pivotal issue impacting the Australian Muslim community, especially Muslim young people,” the job listings read.

“To help assist Muslim young people make that step into employment, the Federal Government has provided funding support for 10 traineeships for Muslim young people to work across the AFL industry over a 12 month period to gain critical work experience and job skills.

“The AFL in turn has partnered with AFL SportsReady to offer a unique traineeship opportunity as part of the Bachar Houli Employment Program.”

The Turnbull government earlier this year announced the traineeships as part of an additional $625,000 in funding for the AFL’s long-running Bachar Houli Cup and Leadership Program.

Bachar Houli, the AFL’s Multicultural Ambassador, is Richmond’s star player and considered a mentor and role model for young people in the community.

Houli was a guest at Malcolm Turnbull’s pre-election Iftar dinner celebrating the end of Ramadan.

The “selection criteria” for the AFL positions advertised in Victoria and Queensland specify that applicants “must be from a Muslim background”, with a disclaimer noting that the action constitutes a “special measure” or “equal opportunity measure” under the respective state anti-discrimination laws.

In NSW, which is the only jurisdiction without a clear “special measures” provision in its anti-discrimination legislation, the listing reads: “Applicants from a Muslim background are strongly encouraged to apply for this position”.

NSW applicants must instead have “a demonstrated knowledge and understanding of the Muslim faith”, “a demonstrated knowledge and understanding of multicultural communities”, and “a demonstrated ability to communicate sensitively and effectively with diverse communities”.

The fulltime positions receive the National Training Wage Award plus superannuation, which comes to slightly over $34,000 for the 12 months.

The AFL offers a number of similar positions for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander school leavers as part of its diversity traineeship program, which provides “employment path ways and skill development in young multicultural and indigenous people aged 15-19”.

On the funding announcement in May, Justice Minister Michael Keenan said the program “contributes to a resilient and harmonious society united around shared values of mutual respect, freedom of speech and freedom of belief”.

“It uses sport as a great way to embrace diversity while providing students from Islamic schools with the opportunity to learn to play football in a fun, non-competitive environment,” he said.

The 2016-17 program includes funding for “AFL-hosted Iftar and Eid events held nationally during Ramadan to engage with communities and foster improved cultural education and awareness”.

Last week, a political furore erupted over a $7000 scholarship reserved for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex high school students.

The news sparked renewed debate around the controversial topic of “reverse discrimination” or “positive discrimination” based on gender, sexuality, race or religion.

Muslim cleric says Cologne sex attacks were the victims’ fault Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3408033/Muslim-cleric-says-Cologne-sex-attacks-victims-fault-wore-PERFUME.html#ixzz4GzfuX6i3 Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Imam sammi

A Cologne imam has said the victims of the New Years Eve mob sex attacks had themselves to blame because they wore perfume.

Sami Abu-Yusuf added that he was not surprised the girls were sexually assaulted, groped and raped, because of the way they dressed.

Hundreds of women were attacked by a mob of men in Cologne’s city centre on New Years Eve, with the number of alleged sexual assaults now tallying up to 521, including three rapes.

‘The events of New Year’s Eve were the girls own fault, because they were half naked and wearing perfume,’ Mr Abu-Yusuf told Russian TV according to Breitbart.

‘It is not surprising the men wanted to attack them. [Dressing like that] is like adding fuel to the fire’.

 

Source

Saudi offer to build 200 mosques in Germany

for Syrian migrants is slammed as ‘cynical’ because the Kingdom has not offered to take any refugees themselves

  • Saudi Arabian King Salman will fund construction programme in Germany
  • Politicians say the offer is ‘cynical’ because of the nation’s foreign policy
  • They argue that Saudi Arabia should help by taking in some migrants
  • Also say that they are creating refugees with military campaign in Yemen 

Conservative politicians in Germany have attacked an offer from Saudi Arabia to build 200 mosques in the country for the ‘spiritual needs’ of the Syrian refugees arriving daily in their thousands.

Andrea Scheuer, general secretary of the CSU party in Bavaria which is Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ally in the state, called the offer ‘cynical’ given that the Kingdom is making thousands of refugees of its own in its military campaign in Yemen.

‘No, it is more than cynical. This is no Muslim Brotherhood. Where is the solidarity in the Arab world?’ he asked, given that the Kingdom has not offered to take in refugees fleeing from the civil war in Syria.

Andrea Scheuer, general secretary of the CSU party in Bavaria which is Chancellor Angela Merkel's ally in the state, called the offer 'cynical' given that the Kingdom is making thousands of refugees of its own in its military campaign in Yemen

Andrea Scheuer, general secretary of the CSU party in Bavaria which is Chancellor Angela Merkel’s ally in the state, called the offer ‘cynical’ given that the Kingdom is making thousands of refugees of its own in its military campaign in Yemen

Stephan Mayer, domestic policy spokesman of both the CSU and Merkel's CDU in parliament in Berlin, agreed with him, saying Germany needs solidarity with the refugee crisis, not a cash donation for 200 mosques

Stephan Mayer, domestic policy spokesman of both the CSU and Merkel’s CDU in parliament in Berlin, agreed with him, saying Germany needs solidarity with the refugee crisis, not a cash donation for 200 mosques

The offer comes as tens of thousands of migrants head to the Hungarian border, many of them on their way to Germany, which is expecting 800,000 migrants this year alone

The offer comes as tens of thousands of migrants head to the Hungarian border, many of them on their way to Germany, which is expecting 800,000 migrants this year alone

Thousands of migrants continue to gather at Hungary border

Stephan Mayer, the domestic policy spokesman of both the CSU and Merkel’s CDU in parliament in Berlin, agreed with him, adding: ‘Germany does not need a cash donation to build 200 mosques but solidarity with the refugees.’

The offer comes as tens of thousands of migrants head to the Hungarian border, many of them on their way to Germany, which is expecting 800,000 migrants this year alone

Many newspapers expressed outrage that Germany would ever consider such an offer from a country which practiced an extreme form of Islam which includes punishments such as stoning, flogging and limb mutiliation.

The offer was apparently made through diplomatic channels and surfaced in Lebanese newspaper al diyar towards the end of last week.

According to the report, the mosque construction programme was the idea of the absolutist Saudi monarch King Salman. He is content to give the asylum seekers a wide berth in his own land, fearful as he, and the other arch conservatives who assist him, of them importing a form of political dissent that they believe would threaten the auotcracy.

CDU Deputy Chairman Armin Laschet said: ‘Instead of talking about funding mosques, Saudi Arabia should be thinking about taking refugees and ending financing of ISIS.’

CDU Deputy Chairman Armin, left, Laschet said: 'Instead of talking about funding mosques, Saudi Arabia should be thinking about taking refugees and ending financing of ISIS'

CDU Deputy Chairman Armin, left, Laschet said: ‘Instead of talking about funding mosques, Saudi Arabia should be thinking about taking refugees and ending financing of ISIS’

the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board has a different understanding of the word ‘victimisation’ than the rest of the English speaking world.

Well, the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board has done it again.

It’s referred another complaint from the world’s most offended man to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

Actually, it’s referred eight more complaints from Garry Burns against me to the Tribunal.

You can see Garry’s website and the nice pictures he puts up of me here.

For those who don’t know, Garry Burns is the man who offered to provide my address to Islamic organisations, forcing me to move my family for their safety. That’s how ‘anti-discrimination activists’ roll.

By the way, the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board thinks I’ve ‘victimised’ poor Garry by pointing these facts out. That’s how anti-discrimination boards roll. As a result, I face another costly legal proceeding and the prospect of a fine of up to $100,000. And if any fine is awarded, it’ll line Garry’s pockets.

It seems that the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board has a different understanding of the word ‘victimisation’ than the rest of the English speaking world.

As they say in the business, threatening the lives of conservatives can be rather lucrative, especially if they dare to talk about it. I know. Garry copied me in on an email he sent a while back to other homosexuals encouraging them to lodge complaints against me so that they could seize my house.

However, we’ll look at this whole ‘victimisation’ caper another time.

Today I want to focus on one complaint. The one about me linking to an Andrew Bolt article on Facebook.

You can see that Facebook post below:

Bernard Gaynor

I disagree with Andrew Bolt. The battle for homosexual marriage is not over.

But I do agree with these points that he raises today:

“But what will they now say to three adults wanting that right? To four?

Samuel Alito, a Justice of the US Supreme Court, asked just that last month, asking us to imagine “four people … all consenting adults, highly educated … What would be the logic of denying them the same right?”.

Let’s get specific. What would same-sex marriage advocates say to Sheik Khalil Chami of the Islamic Welfare Centre, or Keysar Trad of the Islamic Friendship Association, who want polygamy allowed for Muslims.

Saying yes to same-sex marriage does not mean ending an argument.

It means opening new ones, with the survival of marriage at stake.

Are the new inheritors of the marriage tradition up to the awesome responsibility of defending the institution they are about to change?”

You can see that Facebook post below:

https://www.facebook.com/plugins/post.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2FBernardGaynorBlog%2Fposts%2F691061477704987&width=500

You can read the complaint here.

You can read the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board’s initial letter notifying me of the complaint here.

You can read the Board’s letter notifying me that it had referred this complaint to the Tribunal here.

It states that the matter is being referred to the Tribunal because the President thinks it can’t be conciliated. It also states that the relevant section of the legislation was attached. But it wasn’t.

For the record, the President asked me if I would be willing to enter into conciliation this many times:

So I’m not sure how he arrived at his conclusion. Maybe Hey Hey It’s Saturday’s Plucka Duck machine has found a home in the black hole that lives in the basement of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board.

At this point, I would like to bring in S.90C of the Anti-Discrimination Act (NSW) 1977. It states:

90C Progress reports

The President must, as frequently as is reasonably convenient and, in any event, at periods not exceeding 90 days, give notice to the parties to the complaint of the steps taken for the purpose of the investigation.

The eagle-eyed among you will have noticed that the Board’s initial letter was dated 6 August 2015 and the referral letter was dated 25 July 2016.

By my calculation, there are 354 days between those two dates.

The President’s progress reports about his ‘investigation’ are linked here.

You’ll notice that there is no link. That’s because the President of the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board seemingly does not obey the statutory regulations he administers. Again, that’s how anti-discrimination boards roll.

They don’t follow their own laws, but they insist on applying them to citizens living in other states who are not subject to them.

I’m sure it makes sense to the President of the Anti-Discrimination Board, even if I can’t follow it.

Anyway, I rang the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board to ask them about this little oversight last week. A lovely lady named Ms Connie Santiago answered the phone. I believe her title could well be ‘Official Grand High Commissar of Bureaucratic Excuses, Soulless Destroyer of Common Sense and Chief Advisor to the Committee Entrusted with Undermining Legal Processes’.

She told me that the Board did not believe it necessary or reasonable to provide me with a progress report blah, blah, blah. Then she said I would need to put my query in writing if I wanted more detail.

At that point, I was filled with indignation of the righteous variety. I may have even lost my temper.

Just so you know, I have already asked the President numerous times in writing why he fails to provide progress reports about his alleged investigations. He has not responded once. I believe it’s because he doesn’t ‘do’ investigations at all. He, and the entire NSW Anti-Discrimination Board, simply exists to destroy respondent’s lives.

That’s how anti-discrimination boards roll.

I also informed Ms Santiago – again – that the Tribunal ruled last year that there was no jurisdiction to hear complaints under the Anti-Discrimination Act (NSW) 1977 against people living outside New South Wales. You can read this ruling for yourself here.

I was told that that this ruling made the matter complicated. I’m still not sure how. In my mind it makes the matter very simple for the President to decline. And just so you know, the President has the power to decline complaints under the Act for this very reason. Or even for any other reason for that matter.

True, good ol’ Garry is appealing this decision. It may be overturned. But for the sake of all Australians, I hope not. Garry’s conduct should be confined to the state of New South Wales and the poor sods who voted in the government that funds the bureaucracy that exists only to process his never-ending complaint-a-thon (in fact, Gazza is responsible for almost all homosexual vilification complaints in the entire history of New South Wales).

This appeal now sits somewhere between the NSW Court of Appeal and my diminishing bank account. I understand that both the state of New South Wales and the Commonwealth are set to intervene. Who knows where it will end up?

But we do know where the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board wants it to end up.

It wants to be able to prosecute any Australian – indeed any citizen in the world – for the most mundane opposition to homosexual political activism.

It wants to be able to prosecute people like Andrew Bolt by proxy and without even notifying them that their words are about to be investigated in a legal proceeding.

Finally, it wants to be able to hold one person responsible for the actions of another.

This is totalitarianism, bureaucratic abuse and oppression straight out of 1984.

We can see this when we look at the complaint in detail. And we must remember that it is a complaint that I haveincited hatred, serious contempt or severe ridicule of homosexuals. Yet the complaint focuses almost entirely on the words of other people published under license with Facebook.

I did not publish these words. I did not author them. Other people did.

Yet the Anti-Discrimination Board, with all its secret investigatory powers, seems to be unable to comprehend this. Again, it seems suspiciously like the Board just doesn’t ‘do’ investigations and instead works as a rubber stamp for Garry Burns who, unfortunately for many reasons, has admitted many times that he is obsessed with me.

Thank you, Lord, for providing my purgatory here on earth.

So the Board is pushing ahead with the case against me, even as it fails to include Facebook, Andrew Bolt or anyone else who was actually responsible for writing or publishing the words that offended poor Garry so greatly in the complaint.

The entirety of my own words in this complaint are these:

I disagree with Andrew Bolt. The battle for homosexual marriage is not over.

But I do agree with these points that he raises today:

There is simply no way that any reasonable person could find that these words have incited anything, least of all hatred. As such, it’s probably proof that no one reasonable works at the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board.

These words are clearly about homosexual marriage. So the Board is attempting to silence political opposition to homosexual marriage at a time when we are supposed to be having a national ‘debate’ and a plebiscite to legalise it.

And they clearly refer to an Andrew Bolt article, which I linked to. In order to demonstrate that I have not incited anything, I’ll now need to demonstrate that Andrew Bolt’s article has not incited anything either. That’s because this complaint is also about my link to that article.

It’s an artful way of putting Andrew Bolt on trial. And it’s deceptive too. The Board has decided that Andrew Bolt does not even need to be made aware of this complaint. As such, he is not able to defend his own words. However, I have notified Andrew Bolt of this situation.

At this point, I hope that all journalists and publishers are filled with the greatest concern. And they should be: the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal has already set a precedent that it can make findings that internet publications breach the Act, even though the actual author is not a party to the complaint or able to defend his writing. Instead, the publications came before the Tribunal via prosecutions of third parties that had linked to them.

It’s trial by stealth where the defendant is not able to defend himself at all. And it’s conducted in a division headed by a magistrate who helps to fundraise for homosexual legal organisations, even while she’s sitting in on matters where those outfits are representing complainants. That’s a clear breach of the Civil and Administrative Tribunal’sCode of Conduct.

I write about that here.

And this same magistrate was also recused from a matter involving Mr Burns because evidence was presented that she held private conversations with him. You can read that ruling here.

In Andrew Bolt’s article he resigns himself to accepting that homosexual marriage will be legalised.

I disagree with him on that score.

But I do agree with him on his reflection that legalising homosexual marriage will result in calls for polygamy, especially from the Islamic community. Apparently, the Board wants debate about this issue silenced too.

It’s time for the New South Wales Attorney General to intervene and end this entire farce.

When the Parliament of New South Wales passed the Anti-Discrimination Act (NSW) 1977, it wanted people to be able to express opinions. That’s why it legislated that the Act would not make unlawful:

a public act, done reasonably and in good faith, for academic, artistic, religious instruction, scientific or research purposes or for other purposes in the public interest, including discussion or debate about and expositions of any act or matter.

However, Garry Burns, the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board and the old NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal teamed up to decide that basically nothing was reasonable or in the public interest. The Tribunal found that Victorian political candidate, Tess Corbett, was not entitled to this defence, even when she was asked on the campaign trail in 2013 about her views on proposed changes to anti-discrimination laws.

If a political candidate, presumably letting voters know what they think, is not able to express views as part of a debate or discussion about any act or matter in another state altogether, then no one is.

By the way, Garry Burns is pursuing Tess Corbett for contempt because she has not apologised in the Sydney Morning Herald to him. If he is successful, Tess could even end up in jail.

Some might say that this latest complaint won’t be successful; that the Tribunal will find in my favour again on jurisdiction and also fair public comment. Given the way things have gone in the past, that is some assumption to make.

Furthermore, it misses the point. This entire process is the punishment. Even if I win, it comes at my financial detriment. And it is a no cost tribunal, meaning Burns is unlikely to ever pay. In fact, the Tribunal has even ruled that I must pay his costs in an earlier appeal, even though I won it. That matter is now in the NSW Court of Appeal as well.

And if you are wondering how this has all come about, ponder this fact: the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board proudly reports to the NSW parliament that it consults with the Sydney Beat Project. This organisation exists to lodge complaints against police when they arrest homosexual men for engaging in acts of public indecency and it wants sex in public decriminalised.

Someone’s perverting justice in New South Wales and it’s not me. And if you’re expecting a response from the NSW Anti-Discrimination Board, don’t hold your breath. They’re protected by statutory secrecy provisions that mean they never have to be publicly accountable for their abuse of process and power.

Like I said, someone’s perverting justice in New South Wales.

Muslims demand polygamy after Italy allows same-sex unions

Polygamy must become a civil right in Italy similar to same-sex civil unions, which the country allowed earlier this year, a prominent Muslim representative has said.

“There’s no reason for Italy not to accept polygamous marriages of consenting persons,” Hamza Piccardo, founder of the Union of Islamic Communities and Organizations (UCOII), wrote in a controversial Facebook post last week.

“When it comes to civil rights here, then polygamy is a civil right. Muslims don’t agree with homosexual partnership and still they have to accept a system that allows it,” he stressed.

Piccardo’s statements caused uproar in Italy, a mainly Catholic country which still remains divided on the issue of civil unions.

“Centuries of fighting for women’s rights can’t simply be brushed aside,” Debora Serracchiani, deputy head of the ruling Democratic Party (PD), told Corriere della Sera paper.

Having several wives “has nothing to do with civil rights,” she added.

European MP for the Northern League, Paolo Grimoldi, pointed out:“This is the moderate Islam with which the Italian government intends to keep the dialogue open.”

Milan Mayor Giuseppe Sala also had to respond to the UCOII representative’s comments, as Piccardo used his photo with two gay men to illustrate his post.

“Piccardo said crazy things. Not only did I have no closeness with him, but I think his positions do much damage to the Islamic world,” Sala said, as cited by Askanews.

The UCOII founder then continued the debate on his Facebook page, saying that “a simple consideration of legal philosophy has sparked a backlash so grotesque as to be even funny.”

He reiterated his stance that polygamy is a civil right and a matter of “equality of citizens before the law.”

“Don’t underestimate the demographic effect of polygamy. It would rebalance population decline and the consequent need for foreign labor,” Piccardo stressed.

In May, the Italian parliament voted in favor of allowing civil unions between people of the same sex, despite strong pressure from the Catholic Church.

 

 

Source

The Pope has embraced jihad denialism at the historical moment that jihadists have declared war on Christianity.

The Pope has embraced jihad denialism at the historical moment that jihadists have declared war on Christianity. His recent denial that jihadism is rooted in Islamist theology, his selective criticism of Western secure border policy and his belief that the celebration of European Christianity amounts to colonialism have many Catholics wondering whether he is capable of protecting the church in a time of crisis.

The jihadist murder of Jacques Hamel marked the end of innocence in the 21st-century Christian West. It is the first time Islamic State jihadists have entered a Western church to kill a priest. Following the attack, the Pope said the world was at war, but he denied its roots were religious. Instead, he ascribed jihadism to a battle over resources and money.

Empirical evidence suggests the Pope is wrong ­— gravely so. The murder of Hamel was inspired by Islamism, motivated by hatred of Christians, enacted by jihadists and claimed by Islamic State. In its propaganda mag Dabiq, Islamic State vowed that Christians “will not have safety, even in your dreams, until you embrace Islam. We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women.”

Normandy’s Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray church was one of several Catholic churches found on an Islamic State hit list. L’Express magazine reported that one of the Rouen jihadists, Adel Kermiche, explained in advance his plan to attack Christians as they prayed: “You take a knife, you go into a church. Bam!” What part of jihadism does the Pope not understand?

The jihadists smiled after slitting Hamel’s throat and desecrating the altar before turning on nuns and parishioners. Consistent with jihadist trial by ideology, they investigated the nuns for Koranic compliance. After one nun, Helene Decaux, attested to reading several surahs and offered respect for the Koran, the Islamists denied Christ, stating: “Jesus cannot be God and a man.”

Islamists are monotheistic and deny the triune God of Christianity to the degree that some Islamic countries codify the submission of Christians by prescribing them second-class citizen status under sharia law. However, Pope Francis appears unable or unwilling to grasp the connection between political Islam, anti-Christian oppression and jihadism.

In a press conference, a journalist asked why he hadn’t referred to Islamic terrorism or fundamentalism when speaking about the jihadist killing of Hamel. In his reply, the Pope indulged in base cultural relativism by comparing the system of transnational jihadism with individual instances of domestic violence.

The latest issue of Dabiq offers a timely corrective to the Pope’s loose grasp on the reality of jihadism. Titled “Break the Cross”, its cover depicts a jihadist desecrating a church by destroying the cross on its steeple. Its authors urge Muslims to subjugate Christians and kill those who refuse to submit. Subjugation takes the form of cultural genocide. In the caliphate, Christians are banned from building or rebuilding churches, wearing the cross and openly practising their faith. They are required to “make room for Muslims and stand for them when they want to sit”. And they are forced to pay Muslims a hate tax, jizya, simply for being Christian. As the jihadists state, the purpose of the tax is to elevate Muslims over Christians and Jews.

Despite the increasing frequency of Islamist terror attacks on Western citizens, political and religious leaders commonly lapse into what I would describe as jihadist denialism. The constitution of jihadist denialism is: the creation of a false distinction between Islamic scripture and Islamist terrorism; a form of cultural relativism that holds Christians and Jews equally responsible for modern terrorism as jihadists; a sole focus on the militant expression of jihadism while ignoring its political form; and the omission that codified inequality is a political fact of many Islamic states under sharia law. Jihadist denialists often omit the influence of Christianity in the formation of the secular state, the idea of free will and free choice, the abolition of slavery, the recognition of formal equality and universal human rights.

Jihadist denialism minimises both the deleterious effect of political Islam and the positive legacy of Christianity. It is a dual fallacy.

The confusion that besets Western political and religious leaders when faced with jihadism is a luxury that persecuted Christians in Islamic nations cannot afford. Several organisations such as Open Doors and the Pew Research Centre have produced research showing Christians are the most persecuted religious group worldwide. The primary persecutors of Christians are Islamist and communist regimes. There is no equivalent persecution of Muslims in the Christian-majority nations of the West.

Reverend Majed el-Shafie is a refugee who fled the Islamic world after being imprisoned and tortured by the Egyptian government for converting from Islam to Christianity. In the wake of Hamel’s murder, el-Shafie explained its cause to British newspaper SundayExpress with a clarity that appears to have eluded the Pope: “I believe Christians are a main target just like we used to be. This has been happening to Christians in the Middle East for hundreds of years.” Islamic State is simply the latest iteration of jihadism whose global organisations include al-Qa’ida, Hezbollah and Hamas. As el-Shafie stresses: “The problem is the ideology of the extremists.”

The principal aim of jihadists is to impose a global caliphate governed by sharia law. To achieve it, they must destroy liberal democracy, Judeo-Christianity and all of the West’s attendant freedoms.

Our response to jihadism should not be appeasement born of denial and fear, but the courage to think free thoughts, speak freely and pray to the god of our belief, or observe no god at all. If the West is to survive the 21st-century war with Islamist terror, we must adopt a zero-tolerance policy towards jihadists and their ideology. That means supporting persecuted Christians by doing what jihadists loathe: rebuilding the churches they destroy, supporting the communities they persecute, giving shelter to Christian refugees, letting the church bells ring out and wearing the cross with honour.

 

 

Source

If we can’t ban halal meat, we should at least let people know when they’re buying it

The UK now carries out more halal slaughter than the rest of Europe. Most of us eat halal meat unwittingly on a daily basis, since it is sold in most major outlets, including big brand-name supermarkets, without being labelled as such

The EU’s 2009 Slaughter Regulation requires all animals, including poultry, to be stunned before slaughter. Stunning is defined as any intentionally induced process which causes loss of consciousness and sensibility without pain, including any process resulting in instant death.

President Sarkozy says that halal is the 'issue which most preoccupies the French' AFP
President Sarkozy says that halal is the ‘issue which most preoccupies the French’ AFP

The UK has invoked the “religious exemption” from the EU’s “slaughter directive” and in practice now carries out more halal slaughter than the rest of Europe.  Traditional halal meat is expected to be killed by hand and must be blessed by the slaughterman. The exception allows for animals to be slaughtered without being stunned first.

The halal market is worth £2.6bn in Britain alone, and the export market is also growing particularly in the Middle East.  Most of us eat halal meat unwittingly on a daily basis, since it is sold in most major outlets, including big brand-name supermarkets, without being labelled as such.

No one knows at present what form Brexit will take.  Will we still be part of the “single market” and therefore bound by common rules?  Will we, on the contrary, be free to develop our own set of rules and standards, even if these go beyond EU requirements?

Personally, I much regret that the UK invoked the “religious exemption” in the first place.  I don’t believe that religious convictions, however deeply held, justify unnecessary cruelty to animals – a position which, I am glad to say, has been vigorously maintained for some time by organisations such as the British Veterinary Association, the Humane Slaughter Association and the RSPCA.  I would be happy to see specific UK legislation, drafted to replace the EU slaughter directive, explicitly preclude the “religious exemption” from pre-stunning requirements.

I recognise, however, given the strength of feeling in some quarters (and given the explicit commitments in the Conservative 2015 Manifesto to “protect methods of religious slaughter”), that “dropping the religious exemption” may be difficult to achieve in the present context, however desirable in the long term.

But there is, happily, another way of rapidly achieving an important step forward as far as the halal issue is concerned and that is to introduce in the UK a mandatory labelling scheme whereby any and all halal meat offered for sale (including for exports) would be clearly labelled as such.

The EU Commission at present is investigating just such an option but it’s likely to be a long time coming. Nor do individual EU member states have much freedom in this area to take unilateral action. Mandatory labelling schemes devised by individual EU member states for application in their own territory are almost always struck down by the EU authorities as being contrary to the principles of the Common Market. And, of course, EU-wide labelling schemes may no longer affect us at all.

But as far as the halal issue is concerned, Brexit might allow us to devise and implement precisely such a national labelling scheme.  The key building block here is of course the operation of informed consumer choice. If the consumer actually knows what he or she is buying, we would – I believe – in very short order see in a major reduction of halal products without at the same time offending the sensibilities of religious groups.

More generally, well-judged “post-Brexit” action by the UK in the field of animal welfare and the environment may act as a spur and a stimulus to our continental, but no longer-EU, partners to up their own game.

Many years ago, the UK banned the rearing of veal calves in crates.  The EU eventually followed suit. UK rules on animal experimentation were eventually followed by EU directives. We may no longer be able to throw our weight around in the EU, but there is a wider world out there – UN specialised agencies, for example – dealing with international animal welfare and environmental matters where we should be proud to take a lead.

Stanley Johnson is a former Conservative MEP, author and journalist. He was the Founder-Chairman of the European Parliament’s Intergroup Group on Animal Welfare and holder of the RSPCA’s Richard Martin Award for Outstanding Services to Animal Welfare

 

 

 

Source

ISIS to Christians: Convert or “live under the authority of Islam in humiliation,”

 or “only thing between you and us is the sword”

Note first that this jihadi’s explanation for his actions in becoming a terrorist begins and ends with Islam. He doesn’t talk about poverty or lack of opportunity. Then note his theological critique of Christianity: Muslims proselytize among young Christians worldwide using arguments like the ones below, and the various churches have nowhere bothered to help their youth formulate responses to these arguments. Finally, note that everything Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi says about how the Christians will be treated is based upon the Qur’an: “Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued” (Qur’an 9:29).

“Trini ISIS sniper: All Christians must die,”
“Trini ISIS sniper: All Christians must die,”

 

ISLAMIC State’s most recent edition of its online propaganda magazine, which calls on Jihadists to destroy Christianity, features an extensive interview with a Trinidadian fighting with the terror group. He says Christians should die by the sword.

Named in the article as Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi, he said Christians are legitimate targets “due to their mere disbelief,” and “for this reason, amongst others, the Islamic State leadership emphasised the importance not to differentiate between disbelieving soldiers and their so-called ‘civilians.’”…

Dabiq: When did you become a Muslim and how did it happen?

Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: All praise is due to Allah. May blessings and peace be upon Allah’s Messenger.

I come from a family of Baptist Christians, so from a very young age they would send my cousin and me to Sunday school. There I would learn about the Bible, parts of which I even memorized, and also learn about the prophets. My journey towards Islam began when I was around 7 or 8 years old. My mother would take me to church on Sundays. While attending service one day as the members of the congregation were singing and dancing, I took a look around at the pictures they claimed to be of Jesus, angels, and others, as well as the crosses. I said to myself, “Something is wrong here,” because I remembered that the first two commandments were, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me” and “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image,” as I had been taught in Sunday school.

So this had an affect on me as well as the fact that I used to see the pastor – who was married with children – coming next door to commit adultery. I would wonder how this man could lead me when he himself didn’t follow the Bible. I told my mother that I didn’t want to go back to church, and I would pray on my own based on what I’d learned from the Bible. Years later, my grandmother bought me a silver chain with a cross pendant. When I would wear the chain I would think to myself, “This pendant is an idol.” So I took it off and kept the chain. My knowledge of only the first two commandments gave me the understanding that what they were practicing was not in line with the truth. At this point, I didn’t consider myself part of any of the Christian denominations, but that was as far as I got.

In school, I was exposed to all the various religions but I remained upon what I knew. When I was around twenty years old, I would come to accept the religion of truth, Islam. I was working at a call center and got to know a Muslim co-worker there. We happened to share many of the same worldly interests, and for this reason, I would spend much time with him. I used to ask him many questions about the religion. In our conversations I would ask him about the beliefs of Muslims, and would also ask him about Jesus and Muhammad, and everything he told me made sense to me and was in line with what I remembered of the first two commandments, so I quickly gravitated towards Islam and soon found myself debating Christians because I knew their beliefs were corrupt.

Sometimes, because I was drawn to Islam, when I saw him praying, I would pray like him, and when I did, I would feel very calm afterwards. I accompanied him to the Friday sermon a couple of times to see what it was about, and then became certain that this was the true religion – the religion of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. In the last conversation we had before I embraced Islam, I told him that I was planning on selling drugs to support my family. He said that this was wrong and that the ends don’t justify the kill people but I can’t sell drugs to feed my family?”

He then began explaining to me the ultimate purpose of jihad as well as enlightening me concerning some of the Muslims’ plights, and after the conversation, I was settled. So I declared the testimony of faith and became a Muslim.

Dabiq: How did you find the da’wah to jihad?

Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: There was a faction of Muslims in Trinidad that was known for “militancy.” Its members attempted to overthrow the disbelieving government but quickly surrendered, apostatized, and participated in the religion of democracy, demonstrating that they weren’t upon the correct methodology of West, the da’wah to jihad took hold of me through the lectures of Shaykh Anwar al-‘Awlaqi . After listening to his various lectures repeatedly, I gained a firmer understanding of what we as Muslims were supposed to be doing.

I listened to his lecture series titled “Constants on the Path of Jihad” and his lecture series on “The Book of Jihad.” By Allah’s grace, there was a man of sound knowledge who I was able to refer to and who would answer any questions I had. His name was Shaykh Ashmead Choate and he had studied hadith and graduated from one of the Islamic colleges in the Middle martyrdom fighting in Ramadi.

Dabiq: Tell us about your jihad endeavor in Trinidad and Tobago.

Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: I, along with my brothers in Christian paganism is widespread in Trinidad and Tobago Islam Abu ‘Abdillah (another convert from Christianity), Abu ‘Isa, and a number of other brothers from Trinidad that later made hijrah after us formed a group and would deal with some of the issues of the Muslims that people were afraid to deal with. One of our goals was to eventually make hijrah – when we had the ability to do so – and join the mujahidin striving to cleanse the Muslims’ usurped lands of all apostate regimes, and as a result, I would keep myself up to date on all the latest news around the Muslim world and the jihad fronts. We would weigh all of our options as we awaited our opportunity for hijrah. At the same time, we knew that we couldn’t just sit and dream while doing nothing, so whenever the disbelievers in Trinidad would kill or harm a Muslim, we would take revenge. We would work to accumulate money in order to buy weapons and ammo. Alhamdulillah, we were successful in many operations, and this was only by Allah’s grace.

Abu ‘Abdillah, my wife, and I were arrested at one point, but the police weren’t able to make a case against us. We were nonetheless charged for possessing guns and ammunition. They seized my computer and phones and found the videos, books, and lectures on jihad. The taghut government of Trinidad then plotted against us, claiming that we were planning on assassinating the prime minister and a number of other ministers in order to cause chaos and panic in the country. That would have been an honor for us to attempt, but the reality of our operations was much smaller, as I described before. We were imprisoned for terrorism along with some Muslims who merely knew us as well as others whom we had never even met before. Alhamdulillah, they planned and plotted but Allah is the best of planners. They were unable to make a case against us and we were freed, by Allah’s permission, and despite being placed under surveillance, we went back to doing what we knew we had to do, commanding the good and prohibiting the evil….

Dabiq: How did your family react when they found out you became a Muslim?Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: When I became a Muslim, my mother told me that she respected my decision.

Alhamdulillah, she too embraced Islam, a few years after me. She loved Islam so much that she would later say she wished that she had learned of Islam long before so she could have embraced it earlier. Alhamdulillah, one of my brothers also began practicing Islam. As for the rest of my family, I ask Allah to guide them.

Dabiq: How did your family react when they found out you became a soldier of the Islamic State?

Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: Some of my disbelieving Christian relatives have used the fact that I am a soldier of the Islamic State in their quarrels with others. They’ve said, for example, “My relative is an ISIS terrorist, so you better watch out!” Subhanallah, when it comes to the honor that Allah has granted the Caliphate, we even see many disbelievers recognizing it….

Dabiq: As a convert from Christianity, what message would you like to direct to Christians?Abu Sa’d at-Trinidadi: To the Christians I say, you know that you have strayed far away from the true teachings of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus. Your book was corrupted long ago by your leaders. I call on you to remember the first two commandments, for they are what led me to Islam and to the true teachings of all the prophets. Submit to the one who created you and do not differentiate between the prophets, for they all came with the same message. Follow the final messenger, Muhammad, for in doing so you will be following all of the prophets. If you refuse, then we offer you the option to pay jizyah and live under the authority of Islam in humiliation. If you refuse, then the only thing between you and us is the sword.