Muslims who plotted jihad massacre wanted Australians to agree to live under Sharia or be exiled or killed

This supremacist imperative — subjugation or death — is a constant of Islamic history. As I show in my book The History of Jihad From Muhammad to ISIS, there has never been any place to which Muslims have gone where they have not offered those choices to non-Muslims. The West thinks that the situation will be different now due to an orgy of wishful thinking with no basis in reality.

“Islamist Terrorist Planned to ‘Ram People With Car, Shoot People’ in Christmas Day Attack,” by James Hetherington, Newsweek, October 1, 2018 (thanks to the Geller Report):

An Australian man who had planned a terror attack in Melbourne had his confession played in a Victoria courtroom. Twenty-four-year-old Ibrahim Abbas admitted to having planned an attack for Christmas Day in 2016. He appeared in court to provide evidence against co-conspirators over crimes to which he had already pleaded guilty.

His 23-year-old brother, Hamza Abbas, 27-year-old cousin, Abdullah Chaarani, and 25-year-old friend, Ahmed Mohamed, are all now being tried in Melbourne Supreme Court. They have all pleaded not guilty, having been arrested with Abbas on December 22, three days before their planned 2016 attack.

According to, Abbas was grilled on his views and showed strong support for the Islamic State group. He said Australia should live by Sharia law. “They would have to sign a contract to live with, among Muslims in peace. Whoever does not sign the contract either leaves the country or is executed,” said Abbas.

Abbas reportedly recruited people to his terror plan at the Hume Islamic Youth Center, convincing them the attacks needed to be done, according to The Age.

“You could ram people with a car, you can use a knife attack, you can shoot people,” Abbas said, according to The Age. “The bigger, the more terror is achieved, and that’s the point. The whole point of jihad is martyrdom. Martyrdom is attaining death through acts of jihad. Your sins are erased and you are granted paradise.”

In his confession, Abbas said: “I’m going to let you know everything that was said by me. I’m done with all these questions and bullshit. Australia is attacking Muslims in the Islamic State.”

The prosecution alleged that the men were planning to undertake attacks with explosives, knives and firearms against anyone they considered a nonbeliever. The men were allegedly planning to attack Melbourne locations such as Flinders Street Station, St. Paul’s Cathedral and Federation Square.

Efforts to build a bomb were unsuccessful, said Abbas—who had allegedly purchased hydrogen peroxide with Mohamed. “We never really done anything with it because we had no clue,” he said, according to the Herald Sun. “We couldn’t really follow the video properly. I wasn’t able to make a bomb with the hydrogen peroxide.”…


School assignment to write about converting to Islam

This very assignment was given to a class on the Sunshine coast. As advised by a local MP, it was his daughter.

Would any British school have given an assignment to write about converting to Christianity? Of course not. If it had done so, Muslim students, their parents, and Islamic groups would be protesting vociferously, and the school would be apologizing. But in this case, it is the stepfather who is vilified for complaining. And so the Islamization of Britain gallops forward.

“‘I’ve been called a racist and a bigot’: Stepfather explains why he complained when school asked his girl, 12, to write a letter for homework about becoming a Muslim,” by Lara Keay, Mailonline, October 2, 2018:

A stepfather who slammed his 12-year-old’s school for making her write a letter about ‘converting to Islam’ has been called a ‘racist bigot’ and is terrified of violent repercussions.

Mark McLachlan, 43, complained to Kepier School in Houghton-le-Spring, Sunderland when he found the homework task in his stepdaughter’s planner.

He refused to let her finish the ‘letter to my family about converting to Islam’, claiming it was ‘brainwashing’ her about the religion and did not see what it would achieve.

But since posting about it on social media he says he has received a lot of abuse.

He told MailOnline: ‘My wife and I are terrified of the repercussions.

‘Any time anybody says anything negative about Islam they are torn to shreds.

‘I’ve been called a racist and a bigot, but I’m just terrified for my children and for the way this country is going.

‘In 50 years time I can see Britain becoming an Islamic state and my children and grandchildren are still going to be alive – I don’t want them wearing a niqab.’

Mr McLachlan, who has been with the 12-year-old’s mother for five years, said he was particularly outraged by the task because he thinks she is being given a ‘false representation of Islam’.

He added: ‘She was told to google ‘Why should I convert to Islam’, but if she had researched both sides and googled ‘Why shouldn’t I convert to Islam’ she wouldn’t have been able to sleep.

‘I’ve done it and the stuff that comes up is horrific.

‘My stepdaughter is coming home talking about the Prophet Muhammad and halal meat saying Islam is the religion of peace.

‘But if she watched the news and knew about all the atrocities Islam has caused all over the world, she would know it isn’t the religion of peace at all.’

The stepfather, who also has a daughter, stressed he has ‘nothing but respect’ for the deputy head of Kepier School, who was ‘completely understanding of his concerns.

He told MailOnline the teacher has agreed to hold a meeting to review the task and address his concerns.

Nicola Cooper, the school’s principal, said: ‘At Kepier we feel it is very important to introduce our learners to all faiths and cultures and we do this throughout the academic year.

‘For example, next week we will be celebrating all faiths during National Inter Faith Week.

‘We welcomed Mr McLachlan into school earlier this week and were happy to explain to him how we explore all faiths and cultures.

‘Our Culture and Wellbeing programme of study is in line with the National Curriculum and we believe it provides the basis for a broad, balanced and engaging introduction to the areas typically taught in RE and PSHCE.’…

Libertyfest 2018



Sacked for speaking out about Climate Change

Why Was Peter Sacked For Speaking Out?

LibertyFest PROFESSOR PETER RIDDOn 2 May, 2018, Professor Peter Ridd received a letter from James Cook University (JCU) terminating his employment. JCU had sacked him because he dared to question the university and speak the truth about science and the Great Barrier Reef.

This issue started back in August 2017 when he appeared on Sky News with Alan Jones to discuss his chapter in the Institute of Public Affairs’ Climate Change the Facts 2017. He made the following comments:

“The basic problem is that we can no longer trust the scientific organisations

like the Australian Institute of Marine Science, even things like the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies – a lot of this is stuff is coming out, the science is coming out not properly checked, tested or replicated and this is a great shame because we really need to be able to trust our scientific institutions and the fact is I do not think we can any more.”

His eventual sacking, stemming from these comments, kicked off a legal fight that is yet to be resolved but will cost him hundreds of thousands of dollars. To assist with legal fees he embarked on a crowdfunding campaign that has raised over $200,000 to cover some of these costs.

Who is Peter Ridd?

Peter Ridd is a geophysicist with over 100 publications in international journals and over 30 years working on the Great Barrier Reef. He has interests in coastal oceanography, the effects of sediments on coral reefs, instrument development, geophysical sensing of the earth, and mangrove swamp hydrodynamics. Until recently he worked at James Cook University with his very successful consulting group in the Marine Geophysics Laboratory working on the development of instruments including sediment deposition sensors, tilt current meters, and mine paste pipe monitors. He also works on applications to agriculture and weed control including an automated weed-killing robot and non-invasively sensing defects in fruit.

He now works as an independent scientist working to improve quality systems in science and on weed-killing robotics.

Conference Director

Andrew Cooper LibertyFestAndrew is the founder and president of, a not-for-profit do-tank advocating classical liberal values and policies, and, an annual conference series celebrating our liberty where it exists and plotting to expand it where it doesn’t.

He personally subscribes to the credo “live and let live” and believes people should be free to live their lives in any manner they wish provided they do not affect others ability to also do the same. He is convinced that it’s our freedom of choice that lies at the heart of not only economic success but personal happiness and fulfilment.

Andrew studied business at the Queensland University of Technology, is a past president of Entrepreneur’s Organisation Brisbane and a director or investor in commercial property and IT startup companies. He’s also an avid microlender/donor to third-world businesses through, a not for profit organisation that empowers small third-world entrepreneurs with interest-free microloans.

Nyunggai Warren Mundine AO

Officer of the Order of Australia

Warren is a highly respected and influential businessman, political strategist and advocate for empowering the First Nations of Australia to build businesses and sustainable economies. His life and career have been shaped by a personal commitment to community and economic development and he has nearly 40 years’ experience working in the public, private and community sectors.

Anthony MundineWarren has received recognition for his contribution and commitment to Australia. In 2016 he was made an Officer of the Order of Australia. He has Honorary Life Membership of the NSW Local Government Aboriginal Network, was awarded the Centenary Medal for services to the community and local government and received the Bennelong Medal for Leadership in Indigenous Affairs. In 2012 he was made an Alan McGregor Fellow of the Centre for Independent Studies. In 2009 Warren was awarded a Doctor of the University (honoris causa) from Southern Cross University for services to the community, business and local government.

Take away: $30 Billion per year spent on 600,000 Aboriginals. That is $50,000 per man women and child. most money is lost in the bureaucracy.

Jobs provided by corporate liaisons are the best solution. Adults in work – children in school

Who is Senator Amanda Stoker?

Senator Amanda Stoker is a Brisbane based member of the Liberal National Party. On 21 March 2018 she was appointed as a replacement in the Senate for the retiring Attorney-General George Brandis.

She sits in the Liberal Party room in Canberra. is on the Economics, Finance and Public Administration, Public Works, Future Work and Regulations and Ordinances Senate Committees, as well as the Joint Standing Committee on the recognition of Indigenous people in the Australian Constitution.

Amanda StokerAmanda is married to Adam, and is a mother of 3 young girls. She comes to the Senate after a career in the legal profession. Amanda studied law at Sydney University, and commenced her career at Minter Ellison. She was associate to then Justice Ian Callinan AC QC on the High Court of Australia, and Justice Philip McMurdo, who was then on the Supreme Court of Queensland’s commercial list. After some time prosecuting for the Commonwealth in Brisbane and Townsville, Amanda joined the private bar. As a member of Level Twenty Seven Chambers, she practiced in commercial law, administrative law and corporate crime. Amanda has served as Vice-President of the Women Lawyers Association of Queensland.

Amanda joined the Liberal Party at the age of 19. She has spent over a decade growing in the party and giving voice to her convictions. Being motivated by the desire to see Australia return to a country of opportunity based on centre-right values. Amanda looks forward to combating green-left alliance in advocating for the adherence to the time-tested values of Western civilisation.

Who is Sean Jacobs?

Sean Jacobs is the author of Winners Don’t Cheat: Advice for young Australians from a young Australian (Connor Court Publishing 2018).

Sean is a security specialist, having worked for Australia’s inaugural National Security Adviser and led security planning for major events including the 2018 Commonwealth Games and G20 2014 Leaders’ Summit.

Sean JacobsHe has also worked as a senior ministerial adviser and for the Lord Mayor of Brisbane, and the United Nations and the Australian aid program in Fiji and Papua New Guinea. He is a graduate of Griffith and Macquarie Universities, and serves on the Queensland boards of the Australian Monarchist League and the Australian National Flag Association.

In his spare time Sean hosts his own podcast – The Jacobs Podcast – and is a keen writer, with his recent work appearing in The Spectator, Hip Hop Republican and Policy Magazine.

Who is Tony Morris?

Tony is a well known Queensland barrister. In 1992, he was appointed as one of Her Majesty’s Counsel at the age of 32, the youngest such appointment in Australia’s legal history, and the youngest QC appointed in any Commonwealth country during the Twentieth Century.

He has also served as a director of Queensland Investment Corporation; as a member of the Advisory Council of the Queensland Conservatorium of Music; as a Councillor of the Canine Control Council (Queensland); and as Chair of the Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry.

In February 2016 QUT Administrative Assistant Cindy Prior sued three QUT students for comments made, or allegedly made, after she evicted them from the computer lab at the university’s Oodgeroo unit in May 2013. On November 4, 2016 Federal Circuit Court Judge Michael Jarrett ruled there was no case to answer.

As a result of this litigation the reputation of the Human Rights Commission, together with its then president, Gillian Triggs, was severely damaged; the case against Section 18C of the Human Rights act was re-opened by a Federal Parliamentary Inquiry; Cindy Prior went close to bankruptcy; and three young men had their lives torn apart over innocuous comments.

Who is Renee Gorman?

Renee Gorman is a prominent student activist, political commentator, and journalist who was recently crowned ‘Libertarian Activist of the Year’ at the 2018 Friedman Conference. She cut her teeth as a freedom fighter when she screened the controversial film ‘The Red Pill’ on campus at the University of Sydney early last year, despite the student union attempting to shut her down. From there she has worked tirelessly to promote intellectual diversity, defend free speech and call out unjust policies on university campuses.

Renee GormanShe has made multiple appearances on prominent media platforms including: The Bolt Report, The Project, Triple J’s Hacked, Miranda Devine Live and even the popular American online show ‘Louder with Crowder’. She is currently at the IPA and has hosted multiple successful pro-liberty events including ‘The Dangers of Socialism’ which was attended by over 145 young people. Her work aims to ensure the increasing curtailing of free speech and violent protest that is occurring in the USA and UK does not take hold on Australian campuses.

Social commentator and men’s issues advocate

  • Bettina will be talking about her ban from a speaking engagement at La Trobe University
  • VIP Ticket Holders can meet Bettina Arndt in the Liberty Lounge between sessions

Who is Bettina Arndt?

Bettina ArndtBettina Arndt trained as a clinical psychologist before becoming well known as one of Australia’s first sex therapists. She then became a respected social commentator appearing regularly on television and radio and writing about gender issues. She’s now making YouTube videos campaigning to end the demonisation of men.


Who is Daisy Cousens?

Daisy is a freelance journalist, political commentator, and (occasional) provocateur based in Sydney, Australia. She graduated from the University of Sydney in 2015 with a Master of Creative Writing; preceded by a Bachelor of Music at the Australian Institute of Music, and a Bachelor of Arts at Macquarie University. Soon after completing her Masters, Daisy became a chief contributor at SheSaid Online Magazine, and in 2016 began contributing to The Spectator Australia. Her focus is political ideology, culture, and satire. She was also the Editorial Assistant at Quadrant Magazine and remains a continuing contributor to the Quadrant print edition.

Daisy CousinsAlong with The Spectator and Quadrant, Daisy has also contributed to Mamamia. She was a speaker at the 5th Annual Freidman Conference 2017, focussing on identity politics, the trials of being a feminist ‘apostate’, and how third-wave feminism is harmful to women. Daisy enjoys sports journalism and has freelanced for The Roar Sports, with a focus on tennis. She has also appeared on QandA, ABC News24, Paul Murray Live, The Project, Mark Latham’s Outsiders, Jones and Co, The Bolt Report, The Drum, and Hack Live on ABC2.


David Pellowe

Lloyd Russell – Liberal Democrats Candidate for Longman

Meet TCB Solutions Managing Director Lloyd Russell. Mobile 0413 549 748

Lloyd Russell

 Lloyd Russell MBA (Strategic Management), GAICD, Com Dec Lloyd Russell began his management career in 1986 with the Agri-Services company, Primac Limited. During his tenure, he successfully navigated the business through a major industry downturn in severe drought conditions by changing the branch’s business model and operating structures.

In 1995, he and his family relocated to Brisbane where Lloyd took a position with QRAA, a Queensland Government Statutory Authority. The main focus of this position was the management of numerous financial programs on behalf of the State and Federal governments, targeting rural and regional Queensland.

Early in 2005, Lloyd completed his MBA and moved to the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries holding responsibilities for industry development and export expansion. In 2006, Lloyd successfully completed a Diploma in Company Directorship through the Australian Institute of Company Directors. He is also a Commissioner of Declarations and has continued to update his credentials through Family Business Australia, Governance Institute of Australia, the NeuroPower Group and others.

In February 2007, Lloyd returned to the private sector taking a General Management contract with Watkins Steel Pty Ltd. During his tenure, Lloyd modernised the company’s corporate governance systems, developed and implemented an ambitious growth strategy and project managed the construction of a purpose built factory. Upon completion of this contract, Lloyd established TCB Solutions as a specialist provider of management consulting services to Family and Private Companies.

From the outset Lloyd had a head for business and the complexities of family business therefore by leveraging his three decades in management a vast career in strategic business management he is using his  knowledge and experience to help family businesses survive and thrive.

As a fourth generation agricultural family member, he has a personal and deep understanding of family business and a passion for seeing family businesses rise above the challenges and succeed through difficult times of transition.

An accredited family business advisor and experienced strategist, Lloyd is able to guide family businesses through the complex mix of emotional attachment, diverse ownership and commercial business activity.

With experience spaning many industries including manufacturing, building and construction, gas/petroleum and mining services and agri-business, Lloyd provides strategic, pragmatic and practical advice to improve business processes and streamline systems.

Lloyd Russell’s LinkedIn profile can be viewed

Education Common Core Agenda 21 Dumbing Down Australia

Dumbing down – Australia

The Commonwealth Minister for Education, Dan Tehan, must be congratulated for rejecting the curriculum model pushed by the OECD’s The Future of Education And Skills Education 2030 project that the Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority is planning to adopt as the basis for the next iteration of the national curriculum. Even though the national curriculum has only recently been bedded down and it is impossible to know how effective it will be, Rob Randall, the CEO of the organisation responsible for the national curriculum, recently stated ‘ACARA is leading Australia’s participation in the OECD 2030 Education and Skills Project. It’s exploring the best ways to structure and design a curriculum that fosters competencies essential … in 2030’.  ……

Why States Are Leaving Common Core in Droves – USA

After less than 10 years in the classroom, Common Core could soon be on its way out.

The Obama administration introduced Common Core in 2010, imposing burdensome new standards and tests in an attempt to create uniform educational content across the nation. Despite loud objections from parents, teachers, school leaders, and state officials, 46 states ultimately adopted the standards due to a combination of funding carrots and regulatory sticks.

But over the past few years, states have begun to reclaim their authority to set educational standards. Approximately a quarter of participating states have either downgraded their participation or withdrawn completely from the two new testing consortia introduced by Common Core.

One of those consortia—the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career—once had 20 state participants but now has fewer than four. Florida, for instance, an early adopter of Common Core, withdrew from the test consortium after finding that, among other issues, testing would occur over a 20-day period.

Maryland became the most recent state to roll back Common Core testing when officials there found that it overburdened teachers and didn’t help families.

How exactly? As The Baltimore Sun noted, it required schools to “clear their schedules for several weeks each spring, disrupting classes, and provide computers for students to take the tests in grades 3 through 8, as well as twice in high school.” Teachers lost valuable class time and encountered extensive disruptions.

Moreover, the test results were not delivered until the summer after the end of classes, thus limiting the ability of teachers to use the scores to improve classroom practice.

Maryland now plans to replace Common Core partnership tests with the Maryland Comprehensive Assessment Program—a shorter program that delivers test results sooner. While it remains an open question how much of a genuine departure from Common Core this represents, Maryland is at least taking the first step in reclaiming its autonomy by defining how it will assess student progress.

After all, states are much better suited to evaluate students according to standards that parents care about. National standards like Common Core give priority to national testing, but most parents typically ascribe little value to such large-scale assessments. According to an American Enterprise Institute study, parents rank school safety, values, healthy environment, and curricula as significantly more important than school performance on state tests.

In fact, national standards don’t actually help families or local schools improve their education—they only help number-crunching officials who distribute funding. My colleagues, Lindsey Burke and Jennifer Marshall, have written that parents can gain more useful information from classroom assessments and conversations with teachers about their child’s education.

Moreover, Common Core standards actually encouraged mediocrity rather than higher academic achievement. As Burke and Marshall have noted, “The rigor and content of national standards will tend to align with the mean among states” since the national standards will be plagued by “the same pressures that detract[ed] from the quality of many state standards.”

Educators also say federal standards and assessments limit their own autonomy and capacity to innovate in the classroom. In his book “The Tyranny of Metrics,” Jerry Z. Muller writes, “Many teachers perceive the regimen created by the culture of testing and measured accountability as robbing them of their autonomy and of the ability to use their discretion and creativity in designing and implementing the curriculum of their students.”

By returning education to the local level, teachers and parents can work together to create the system that works best for their children.

Rather than following Washington’s dictates, states should reassert their standards-setting and assessment authority to better enable schools to respond to local families and teachers.

Maryland’s decision to replace these tests is a step in the right direction as the state works to re-establish how it will conduct assessments. Freed from the constraints of Washington, states can then look to each other for best practices and innovations while working with local communities to produce results.

One way states can solidify their own educational standards is by strengthening school transparency measures modeled after the independent reviews that are common in higher education, such as the Princeton Review or College Board. This would empower parents with clear information about school performance, enabling them to hold schools accountable for meeting the needs of their children, particularly when empowered with education choice options.

Maryland has not yet released the costs of its new tests, but other states that have similarly withdrawn from the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Career paid a hefty price to replace it. For instance, Florida spent $220 million on a new test, meaning taxpayers there are still paying to get out of Common Core.

More states should follow Maryland’s path and extricate themselves from the massive federal overreach that is Common Core. Greater transparency coupled with real choice in education—not centralized government—will strengthen education in states across the country.


Common Core is an integral part of UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development: globalization is the standardization of systems. Whether the system is law enforcement or land use or government, the standardization, harmonization, and integration of all international methods of management is essential for total control.
Education is the flash point for embedding system acceptance in all sectors of the population.  Standardized propaganda is developed for pre-kindergarten to post graduate school; this is what is meant by ‘Life Long Learning.’

Breaking down traditional methods of learning in order to re-socialize the populace is the goal.  Obedient, dependent people who are constantly being propagandized will provide the ‘human capital’ to fully implement UN Agenda 21/Sustainable Development.

Regardless of the content of this nationalized and internationalized system of behavioral modification, the goal and outcome will be to fundamentally destroy the individual’s rights.

Kevin Rudd and China :

Published on 6 Aug 2018

SYDNEY, July 18, 2018 — Former Prime Minister of Australia and current President of Asia Society Policy Institute Kevin Rudd delivers an address on Australia’s need for a more balanced relationship with China and the immediate implications and trajectory of the U.S.-China trade war. The speech was followed by a discussion with Bloomberg’s Haidi Lun and an audience Q&A. (1 hr., 16 min.)

Systemic disruptions.

5 great systemic disruptions

  1. Geo Politics
  2. Geo Economics
  3. Technological change : AI revolution  – China has already introduced
  4. Climate Change Sustainability
  5. China as an authoritarian state

China, one party state with semi capitalist system.Authoritarian system about to become the largest economy in the world.

Large scale generational unemployment

Slow burn: Population

Published on 19 Sep 2018

Kevin Rudd, former Australian prime minister and Society Policy Institute president, joins ‘Squawk Box’ to discuss trade war between the U.S. and China.

Why do we treat all Islamic abuse as a mental Illness? Are we saying you have to be deranged to follow Islam?

Germany: Muslim migrant strikes woman in the face, has “obvious mental illness,” is admitted to psychiatric clinic


This Muslim migrant “struck a nearby woman in the face with his fist, saying the words, ‘That comes from Satan.’”

What could this possibly be but more of the global outbreak of mental illness? No doubt German authorities are confused by the fact that the man said, “That comes from Satan.” Is he a Satanist? No. He is a Muslim who is an executor of the wrath of Allah, as specified in the Qur’an: “Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands…” He was rebuking the woman for being, in his view, under the power of Satan, and bringing Allah’s punishment to her. But German authorities would dismiss such an analysis as “Islamophobic.” He’s “obviously” mentally ill. Go back to sleep.

“That comes from Satan 18-year-old mentally ill Afghan abruptly strikes woman in the face of a woman on the train,” translated from “Das kommt von Satan 18-jähriger psychisch kranker Afghane schlägt Frau im Zug unvermittelt ins Gesicht,” Presse Portal, September 21, 2018 (thanks to Searchlight Germany):

Münster Hamm (ots) – Shortly before the Eurobahn RE 10626 stop yesterday at 3:35PM in the Hamm / W station, an Afghan citizen got up from his seat and struck a nearby woman in the face with his fist, saying the words, “That comes from Satan.”

The Afghani, who was already known to the police for similar offenses, was arrested by federal police officers at the Hamm / W station. Due to his obvious mental illness, the 18-year-old Afghan was given medical treatment and then admitted to a psychiatric clinic in Hamm….

Australia: Muslim who advocated murder of Jews found not guilty because he’s a paranoid schizophrenic


This man said: “When you come to a Jew, any Jew, even an old one who looks humble, pretending to be humble … strike him in the head, when you strike him in the head, he will not even sneeze, he will die.”

The Qur’an says: “When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks…” (47:4)

And: “You will surely find the most intense of the people in animosity toward the believers to be the Jews…” (Qur’an 5:82)

But of course, what else could this be but more of the global outbreak of mental illness?

The Australian media is withholding this man’s name and pixelating out his face; protecting the perpetrator is their top priority.

“Man who encouraged killing of Jewish people on Facebook suffered paranoid schizophrenia,” by Rebecca Opie,, September 24, 2018 (thanks to Jill):

An Adelaide man who posted videos on Facebook encouraging the killing of Jewish people has been found not guilty because he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia at the time.

The 52-year-old man from Flinders Park in Adelaide’s west, whose name was suppressed, became the first Australian to be charged with advocating terrorism in December 2016….

The charges related to four videos the man posted on Facebook between July 2015 and January 2016, where he encouraged others to kill Israeli soldiers and Jewish people.

During the videos he speaks in Arabic, referring to himself as a commander with Hezbollah and can be seen brandishing a large kitchen knife and a tomahawk.

In one of the videos, which had been viewed more than 19,000 times, he calls for Jewish people to be attacked with knives.

“When you come to a Jew, any Jew, even an old one who looks humble, pretending to be humble … strike him in the head, when you strike him in the head, he will not even sneeze, he will die.”

In another video he calls for the death of the president of the Palestinian National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas.

Police seized the knife, tomahawk and a chainsaw from his home.

The jury was told there was no dispute between the prosecution and defence that the man advocated terrorism and they agreed he was mentally impaired at the time….

Defence lawyer Edward Jolly said the two forensic psychiatrists who assessed his client agreed he was suffering from paranoid schizophrenia at the time….

Sweden: Muslim migrant cuts man’s throat, stabs him 13 times, brags about it, has gotten psychiatric treatment

“When you meet the unbelievers, strike the necks…” (Qur’an 47:4)

“But despite his continued crimes, Suleman has never ended up in prison. In several cases, the courts have judged that what is required instead is ‘an ambitious treatment’ – which basically means probation with a special psychiatric and social-orientated treatment plan.”

Of course. What else could account for Suleman’s crimes other than the global outbreak of mental illness?

“Migrant cuts throat of Swedish student and stabs him 13 times – brags to friends about it,” Voice of Europe, October 5, 2018:

Last week the Umeå District Court sentenced Sudanese/Egyptian Suleman Suleman to 17 years in prison for a brutal murder on 27 April this year.

A student was murdered with thirteen stab wounds and also had his throat cut. The man bled to death in his apartment. “I would have done it again”, the killer bragged to his friends.

Suleman is described as a violent career criminal. In several cases, however, he has not received any prison sentences – courts have judged that “an ambitious treatment” is needed instead of imprisonment.

The day of the murder 30-year-old Suleman and a friend went to 28-year-old student Albin’s apartment to buy drugs from him.

In the judgment, Albin is described as follows: “As for Albin’s person, he pursued his studies in a very good way, and he was a very caring, appreciated and generally popular person. Shortly after he died he would have finished his master’s degree.”…

The friends pushed themselves into Albin’s apartment. Suleman wanted drugs, but Albin refused to sell anything to him. Suleman then got angry and attacked Albin. During the assault, Suleman pulled out a knife and slashed his thighs. The cuts injured his arteries, which led to severe bleeding. Shortly thereafter, he cut Albin’s throat.

The friend panicked and ran out of the Room. Suleman left the apartment shortly thereafter.

Later, he put pressure on his friend and threatened him: “We forget this day”, he told him according to the police investigation.

But to his other friends he bragged about what he had done. “I cut his throat, and I would have done it again,” he told one of his closest friends….

But despite his continued crimes, Suleman has never ended up in prison. In several cases, the courts have judged that what is required instead is “an ambitious treatment” – which basically means probation with a special psychiatric and social-orientated treatment plan.

However, the ambitious treatment has clearly not helped the man – since within a year he had commit similar crimes. If the latest judgement stands in the supreme court, Suleman will be released again in 11 years.

Banking : Glass-Steagall structural separation of the banking system.

Glass-Steagall will stop banks looting supererannuation


Glass-Steagall structural separation of banks would stop banks from owning, and therefore looting, super funds, and the Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018 has already been tabled in Parliament to make this happen. If you need to, refresh your memory on the stunning scale of the banks’ looting of superannuation by reviewing our 1 August Media Release, “Only Bob Katter’s Separation of Banks bill will stop the banks from looting your superannuation”.


Australia’s big banks have looted hundreds of billions of dollars from the retirement savings of millions of people who are clients of bank-owned “retail” superannuation funds. This looting will be the subject of the next round of hearings of the banking royal commission, which will also question bank regulator APRA for allowing it to happen. The private member’s bill that Member for Kennedy Bob Katter introduced into Parliament on 25 June, the Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018, will stop banks from looting super accounts by forbidding them from owning superannuation funds.

The scale of the banks’ looting of superannuation is stunning. Worse, the regulator, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) knew about it and did nothing—another case of APRA ignoring its own internal warnings, as it did with an internal 2007 report warning of a bubble in home lending.

In 2010 two APRA researchers, then research head Dr Bruce Arnold and his colleague Kevin Liu, published a research paper which revealed that the Big Four banks and financial services giants AMP and IOOF, which own the majority of retail superannuation funds, charged two and a half times the market rate for services to the clients of the funds they owned. According to The Australian’s Anthony Klan on 23 July, their research showed that outside companies that provided services to retail funds charged the market rate of 0.52 per cent of the fund’s assets, but when those services were provided by companies owned by the same bank that owned the retail fund, they charged 1.33 per cent, or 2.5 times the market rate.

Dr Liu blamed this overcharging for the “systemic underperformance” of retail funds. How bad was it? Klan quotes University of NSW economist Nicholas Morris’s research that over two decades, the superannuation industry in Australia has charged $700 billion more in fees compared with its overseas counterparts. That’s $700 billion that is not in the retirement savings of hard-working Australians, but in the profits and bonuses of the banks and their executives.

This looting has been confirmed by another former APRA researcher, Dr Wilson Sy, who served on the Cooper Review into superannuation in 2010 and consults to Industry Super Australia. In a submission to the Productivity Commission’s recent superannuation report, Dr Sy quantified that “The unnecessary wealth transfer is now around $15 billion per year.”

Dr Sy also pointed out that “Differences in reported fees and costs are merely the tip of the iceberg.” He exposed that much of the mechanism for the transfer of wealth from the clients to the banks involved “indirect costs”, including through sophisticated trading methods, such as the bank trading on its own account against the position it is trading for the clients of its superannuation funds, so the bank makes a profit while the clients make a loss.

According to Dr Sy’s modelling, after a 45 year working career on an average salary, clients of bank-owned retail funds could retire with $1 million less than members of industry funds, due to the difference in fees and indirect costs.

Vertical integration

Superannuation is yet another example of how the structure of banks, known as vertical integration, enables them to loot, gouge, fleece, and bleed their customers on an industrial scale. The term vertical integration refers to banks owning multiple financial services, such as financial advice, funds management, stock broking and insurance, which enables them to advise their customers to use the financial services owned by the bank. The banks charge fees for the financial advice, and then more fees for the services they have advised the customers to use. This is a huge conflict of interests, which has enabled banks to push their customers into unnecessary financial products that profit the bank.

Vertical integration in manufacturing can have benefits; in finance it is a criminal scam. In manufacturing it enables a company to value-add to every stage of production from raw materials all the way to the final product; in finance, you are the raw material, and it enables the institution to fleece you at every stage of your financial dealings.

When the vertical integration of Australia’s financial system started in the late 1990s, financial institutions promoted it to the public as a way to keep financial services cheap and efficient. Two decades later the verdict is in. Far from keeping costs low for customers, it has been a cheap way for banks to gouge customers. And not just banks. ABC-TV’s Four Corners on 23 July reported on AMP’s shocking looting of its customers, including for years after they were dead, which vertical integration also made possible.

The real scandal here is that were it not for the banking royal commission, the public wouldn’t know most of this.

AMP would still be bleeding dead customers, and not only would banks be looting their retail superannuation funds, the Turnbull government would be helping the banks to sink their fangs into the low-fee industry funds that union members own, so they could loot those too.

When the revelations of vertical integration abuses by the Big Four banks and AMP first emerged from the royal commission hearings in April, many experts, including former Competition regulator Allan Fels and former Reserve Bank chairman Bernie Fraser, called for the obvious solution: break up the banks. End vertical integration, to remove the conflict of interest between serving customers and gouging profits.

The Glass-Steagall legislation introduced by Bob Katter will do that. The Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018 will stop the big banks from owning any other financial services, including superannuation funds. Although it doesn’t cover non-banks like AMP and IOOF, their conflict of interests with superannuation can be fixed by applying a Glass-Steagall rule to all super funds, that superannuation trustees (owners) cannot also be service providers. If trade unions and the Labor Party are genuine about defending industry funds—the only part of the flawed superannuation system that works, as far as it goes—they should support Bob Katter’s Separation of Banks bill. This goes for all Australians. To end vertical integration and the financial looting it has enabled, demand your MPs debate the bill in Parliament, and vote for it.

Get your MP to support the Bank Separation Bill

Are We on Stolen Land? Tell that to the Berbers

Last month, Greens Senator Dr Mehreen Faruqi spoke some of the most misguided and divisive words heard in parliament in recent times.

Greens Dr Mehreen Faruqi She said: ‘We are subject to rules that white people never are’ and claimed that a ‘culture of online harassment, bullying and toxicity now targets everyone who is not a straight white man’.

As Carl Sagan put it, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Following his inaugural speech only days before hers, Senator Fraser Anning copped disproportionate amounts of flak from the media and from Liberal and Labor MPs with lengthy condemnation speeches in both houses of parliament followed by censure motions.

Being a ‘straight white man’ clearly didn’t help him. If anything, it worked against him. By contrast, Dr Faruqi, a self-proclaimed ‘brown, Muslim, migrant’ has copped nothing of the sort for her own divisive words. And that, of itself, is the proof that her portrayal of ‘white privilege’ is dubious at best.

Her speech begins with: ‘We are gathered here today on stolen land’. Wrong. Australia was lawfully conquered and settled by the British Empire in accordance with the international norms of the old world order. That was a ‘might makes right’ world. Whoever could raise an army and conquer land did so. Muslim Arabs and Turks have had their fair share of conquests, as have Christian Europeans. The Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 sowed the seeds for the modern concept of territorial sovereignty within demarcated borders. Though it wasn’t until 1928 under the General Treaty for Renunciation of War as an Instrument of National Policy that territorial acquisition by force was first attempted to be outlawed through consensus among international signatories.

Otherwise known as the Kellogg-Briand Pact (after its authors US Secretary of State Frank B. Kellogg and French foreign minister Aristide Briand), this 1928 pact of course didn’t succeed in immediately putting an end to all war. In fact, World War II, the most destructive of all conflicts still managed to occur only a decade later. Yet the importance of the pact came in its aftermath.

Shortly after the emergence of the United Nations, its Charter went on to guaranteeing ‘territorial integrity’ to member states. In the process, any territory acquired before the 1928 pact was deemed lawfully conquered under a ‘right of conquest’. Borders essentially became frozen in place and future conquests were made unlawful.

This prohibition was not applied retroactively. Doing so would have thrown the entire world into turmoil since virtually every piece of land has, at some point, been conquered by outside forces – or to use Dr Faruqi’s rhetoric, ‘stolen’.

Since Australia was settled in 1788  – a century and four decades prior to the cut-off point for lawful conquests in 1928  – its territorial legitimacy has never been in doubt. Hence, there are no legal or historical grounds to think of Australia’s founding as land ‘theft’.

As someone who identifies as a Muslim, Dr Faruqi should know of Islamic civilisation’s own territorial conquests far beyond the outskirts of Mecca in the 7th century stretching all the way to Spain in the west and China in the east.

Does she believe the Arabic-speaking Islamic countries that today stretch across North Africa, having conquered and replaced the indigenous Egyptian, Carthaginian, Berber and Nubian civilisations are all ‘stolen lands’? Does she believe that Iran, once home to an indigenous Avestan-speaking Zoroastrian culture, is ‘stolen land’?

There was once an indigenous Hindu civilisation in Dr Faruqi’s own country of origin, Pakistan. Islam was first introduced in the region by Umayyad conqueror Muhammad Bin Qasim in 711. Does she believe that Pakistan is built on ‘stolen land’? One wonders, was Dr Faruqi not aware of Australia’s colonial history prior to her arrival? If so, why bother choosing to migrate to a country whose historical foundations fill you with such moral dread?

It is hypocritical to refer to something as ‘stolen’ while continuing to benefit from its use. It is literally the equivalent of driving around in a stolen Rolls Royce while simultaneously complaining that it is stolen. Since she has a problem with British colonialism, it defies logic why she would leave her country of origin, that was freed from British rule in 1947, to then end up in Australia which still carries the Union Jack on its flag and has Queen Elizabeth II as its Head of State.

Worse yet, she goes on to declare: ‘I bring to this chamber my track record on shaking things up and shifting the agenda on issues as diverse as decriminalising abortion, drug law reform, LGBTQI rights, the right to die with dignity and protecting our environment.’

With the exception of protecting the environment, literally everything else on her list is at complete odds with Islam. There isn’t one credible scholar of mainstream Islamic jurisprudence from any one of the four Sunni (Hanafi, Shafi’i, Maliki and Hanbali) and three Shi’ite (Ithna Ashari, Isma’ili and Zaidi) schools of thought that has ruled in favour of abortion, drugs, same-sex marriage, gender fluidity and euthanasia.

What Dr Faruqi seems to be following isn’t exactly ‘Islam’. It’s her own ideological fusion tinged with cultural Marxism, third-wave feminism and post-colonialism which she thinks is Islam when she boasts in her speech of being ‘unapologetically… a brown, Muslim, migrant’. This alliance between secular Muslim activists and the far-Left isn’t one based on strict theological, jurisprudential or moral consistency. They’re not united by common values so much as they’re united against a common enemy; that is, Anglo-Celtic, Judeo-Christian Western civilisation.

As long as secular Muslim activists are provided a platform by the far-Left to fight imaginary ‘racism’, ‘white privilege’ and ‘colonialism’, they will continue to appropriate the values of the far-Left into their political goals without shame even if that means deviating from established Islamic jurisprudence.

The radicals are easy enough to identify. It’s their secular counterparts that are often more dangerous in the long run, because they’re the ones who end up being elected to parliament and then use the institution as a vehicle to advance their goals. By her own admission, Dr Faruqi’s speech was precisely that.







Ex-Muslim asks Muslims if Islam can be criticized, is told “There are only two choices, Islam or death”

Video: Ex-Muslim asks Muslims if Islam can be criticized, is told “There are only two choices, Islam or death”

This happened in Australia. What are the odds that the people interviewed in this video will become loyal, productive members of Australian society, upholding the freedom of speech as the foundation of a free society?

“‘There are only two choices, Islam or death’: Ex-Muslim walks through Lakemba asking locals if it’s OK to criticise their religion – and gets some VERY strong responses,” by Laura Hedges, Daily Mail Australia, September 19, 2018 (thanks to The Religion of Peace):

A former Muslim has taken to the multicultural streets of Lakemba in Sydney’s west to ask local believers whether it is okay for people to criticise their religion.

Iranian-born author Armin Navabi visited Lakemba – considered Australia’s unofficial Muslim capital – to act out the controversial social experiment.

Mr Navabi, an ex-Muslim now living in Canada, was told by one man that non-believers faced ‘Islam or death’ – while another Muslim said police should ‘attack’ those who mock their faith.

Others interviewed said they encouraged discussions about their Muslim faith, but stressed the importance of approaching the topic with the ‘utmost respect’….

Many of the locals interviewed in the video took the stance that they were open to discussion and dialogue around their faith.

‘We live in a democratic country. We criticise other people when they do the wrong thing. Why are we immune from that?’ one person said.

The majority stressed it was important for any criticism or questions to be posed with the utmost respect.

‘Everything is criticisable, with respect,’ another man said.

‘Especially because religion is a sensitive topic for everyone.’

After further questioning of one man, Mr Navabi was told he believes the Muslim community eventually wants Sharia Law to be established worldwide.

‘100 per cent that is my goal – and every Muslim’s goal. To establish Sharia law on earth,’ the man claimed.

Mr Navabi questioned whether this meant ‘somebody like me’ who had turned his back on Islam would be ‘killed’ if Sharia law was in place.

‘That’s Sharia law, that’s what I believe in,’ the man stated.

‘There’s two choices, Islam or death.’

Another man said that anyone who criticised Islam should be attacked by police.

‘If people criticise then it’s bad yeah, and the police need to attack them,’ the man said.

Mr Navabi also spoke with a local sheikh who said he was open to questions about Islam as he hoped it would help answer any misconceptions people have.

But when Mr Navabi asked if it was okay to ‘mock’ Islam, the sheikh’s response took a turn.

‘When somebody comes and mocks any religion and they say that my intention inside was a good thing, there’s not one scenario in the entire globe where you mock somebody for the sake of goodness,’ he said.

He said that anyone who finds it normal to mock and laugh at other people have ‘lost human morality’ and ‘lost all senses of being a human’.

When Mr Navabi then stated his own opinion that mocking somebody formed part of freedom of expression, the sheikh called it ‘most disgusting’….