So it's to be: On with the Burka, Off with the Spanx and Cop a regular spanks to get 'fertilised'.

"Halal boss says Australian women need Muslims to 'fertilise them' as white race becomes extinct
Mohamed El-Mouelhy points to research showing a declining sperm count in Australian men.

A prominent businessman has boasted of how Australia's white race will become extinct in 40 years because the country's men have a declining sperm count.

Mohamed El-Mouelhy, the boss of a halal certification firm, said Australian women would "need us to fertilise them and keep them surrounded by Muslim babies".

In the provocative Facebook post to his followers on Wednesday (26 July), he went on to say that "beer swilling, cigarette smoking, drug injecting [Australians] can only dream of what Muslim men are capable of".

The businessman, who is the head of Halal Certification Authority, one of Australia's largest certifiers, added: "If the country is left to the bigots the white race will be extinct in another 40 years. Muslims have a duty to make your women happy because you are declining, better go chose a plot for youself [sic] at your local cemetery.

"If you can't afford it, commit suicide it is a cheaper alternative for bigots."
..
It came just days after El-Mouelhy took to Facebook to predict that the popularity of halal food in Australia was "increasing in leaps and bounds" and that Australians – including non-Muslims – will be eating it "more than ever""

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/halal-boss-says-australian-women-need-muslims-fertilise-them-white-race-becomes-extinct-1632332

Eagerly awaiting Foxy's apologetics for this.

That's 4chan tier bait!

What this piece of human garbage (typical of the sort that should never have been allowed across our borders) say is true: white Australia will die out. The science is true about the growing inability to breed – thanks to alcohol and drug abuse – but white people don't much want to have children anyway.

Conversely, Muslims breed like rabbits with a view to Islamising the world. Further, our treasonous governments continue with mass immigration of the wrong sort of people – white immigrants are no longer interested coming here. Asian-born residents now outnumber European born.

It's all downhill from here.

His theory is flawed because as in the UK and other places where the Muslims are fervently seeding the female population it is with underage girls some as young as 10 years old.

Margaret Court attracted much more attention from the 'Progressive' set, for some reason. They were self-righteous, frothing at the mouth in Margaret's case. Did Waleed Aly proffer a view on Margaret? He may have. What about Tim from AHRC?

Just wondering if anyone really ought be taking offence. OLO's experts will be along to assist. ...But then, maybe not too..

This clown even looks a bit like Trump. What a clown. I kind of agree with him that bigots are indeed a threat to this country but certainly not in that manner. What is it about these blokes when they hit late middle age. I get that you don't care as much about remaining PC but do you really have to throw out acting with a little bit of class.

Dear Phillip S,

Not saying there wasn't an issue in the UK because it certainly was. I also recognise that older Australian males make up the highest per capita number of participant in the underage sex tourism in Thailand. They are streets ahead of any other country and if I were the foreign minister of that country I would have banned them years ago. What do you think?

"Offenders in Rochdale [UK] child sexual abuse scandal 'remain at large'

Former Greater Manchester police officer says lessons have not been learned and calls for change to law to allow senior officers to be prosecuted"

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/may/16/offenders-in-rochdale-child-sexual-abuse-scandal-remain-at-large

SteeleRedux Quote "older Australian males make up the highest per capita number of participant in the underage sex tourism in Thailand."

What is the source of this disturbing statement?

Lucky Aussie Women - Wow - unbelievable.

Here we are ladies - wait for it. Mohamed Elmouelhy has
told his Facebook followers that Australian women
need Muslim men to "fertilise them" and "keep them
surrounded by Muslim babies" (not just any babies,
but Muslim ones). And ladies get this - he made the
comment after Hebrew University in Jerusalem published
research which showed that sperm counts in men from
Australia, New Zealand, North America and Europe had declined
by more than 50 per cent in less than 40 years. And don't
ask how they know this or came to this conclusion.
Is it fake news? Not according to Mohamed ElMouelhy.

There you go - Men lock up your wives and daughters
and stop smoking, drinking, injecting drugs, eating fatty
foods - otherwise these bad, evil, randy Muslims will
have their way with your women.

After all Aussie women are so fit and sexy, healthy and
fertile - and Muslim men according to Mr Mohamed have a
duty to perform.

And he of course assumes that on top of everything else
Aussie women are brainless as well.

' And he of course assumes that on top of everything else
Aussie women are brainless as well.'

I am not sure if it was men or women in the Immigration Depth that let these guys in Foxy. Of course he passed the 'citizenship' test.

Dear Phillip S,

This has been known for decades.

“An ECPAT study that was released in 1994, recorded the number of foreign men who were arrested by Asian police for sexually abusing children in Asia. The three year study showed that of the 160 foreign men arrested, 25% were American, 18% were German, and 14% were Australian.”

That ratio keeps increasing;

Australians, for instance, have been identified as the largest group of sex tourists prosecuted in Thailand (31 per cent of the total).
Wikipedia

When the relative numbers of male visitors from these three worst countries were taken into account plus the size of their countries then Australia becomes a standout this is despite Australia even then having the most up to date laws in this regard.

Efforts by the Australian and Thai governments have helped to curb this to a degree. Now the focus has shifted to Indonesia.

“Of the 107 sex offenders denied entry to Indonesia this year, 92 were from Australia.”
http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/4776467/indonesia-reveals-huge-influx-of-australian-child-sex-offenders/?cs=5

Given that the average number of children an Australian will abuse while on holiday to places like Indonesia or Thailand is said to be around 10 and given that less than 5% are thought to be caught there are literally thousands of children being raped each year at the hands of Australian men. What is it about the older Australian males which makes them so attracted to young children for sexual pleasure?

I would completely understand if either of those countries banned lone Australian men from obtaining visas. Would you support it too?

Dear SteeleRedux,

Here's another link that may be of interest:

http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/do-you-think-well-pay-for-bad-things-weve-done-revelations-of-aussie-sex-tourists-in-thailand/news-story/a1490ec57bb51253003aa5a2c1547acd

It helps explain a few things.

SteeleRedux & Foxy,

You are both welcome to start your own thread on the subject of sex tourism rather than to deliberately hijack this one.

Foxy in particular, since you are always the very first to object and so stridently!, if a poster appears to stray from what you intend, your leading!, on a thread.

However, just to show the obvious flaws and silliness in SR's speculative projections of thousands of sex molestations by 'old Australian men' that readers are encouraged to imagine are being committed as they read, the reason why Australians feature higher in detections is because of intel sharing agreement and cooperation initiatives by both governments.

Bluntly to the numerically challenged, or to those who deliberately mislead (take your pick), of course the number of Australian offenders would be proportionally higher as a result. Other governments may not (are NOT) doing that.

tbc

continued..
Also, because the Australian and other governments are sharing intel and Australia is taking action on passports it would be quite wrong, a deliberate lie, to speculate, to pretend, that could be many thousands of offences being committed by Australians. Simply put, they are not getting there to offend. They are at home, doubtlessly benefiting from the 'policies'(sic) of the lunar left that always benefit offenders at the expense of victims and the exasperated public. Idiocy as is being presently witnessed in the ACT where Greens roll logs in the road of action against drug-dealing, violent, outlaw motorcycle gangs.

Speaking of drug trafficking, that is another area where the AFP are involved in intel sharing with other governments to the mutual benefit of those governments and their citizens. But such a scream from the criminal rights sensitive leftists and Greens (OLO social justice warriors, SJWs, too, who only seem to care about protecting offenders) when criminals are caught red-handed.

Now, what about the two of you admit and applaud the splendid world-class initiatives of the Turnbull government's actions against loathsome child molesters, such as sharing intel and refusing passports and then go off to start your own thread if you would like to pursue it further? SteelRedux especially, since you don't appear to have ever started a thread and it your habit to hijack threads instead.

Mmmm,

Leoj pops here in to invite Foxy and myself to start a different thread because he felt it had been hijacked.

This was despite the fact that we were responding to a comment by Phillip S who was busily diverting the thread to sex crimes in the UK which had nothing to do with what some clown in Australia was spouting on about low sperm counts.

Was there an invitation for phillip S to start his own thread? No. Because in leoj's mind all that is required to make an 'approved' connection is that the subjects are Muslim. What rubbish.

After his invitation he then proceeded to wax lyrically on the so called diverted topic. Deeply hypocritical though quietly amusing.

Last sentence, "SteelRedux especially, since you don't appear to have ever started a thread and it your habit to hijack threads instead",

should be,

"SteelRedux especially, since it your habit to hijack threads instead".

leoj,

Nobody was/is attempting to hijack your discussion.
People are entitled to respond however to other
posters on the thread. Also for someone like yourself -
who consistently
introduces and rants on about irrelevant issues on
discussions all the time you are in no position to tell
others what to do. Lead by example. And until you do'
you have no credibility in this area.

BTW - did you even read the link I gave to SteeleRedux?
It explained the reasons why Australian retirees went
to these places.

Foxy,

It was a hijack. As usual. Kindly start your own. As you are always demanding of others.

Back to the thread.

leoj,

No - responding to someone else's post is NOT
a hijack. It was not me who raised that issue
and blaming me for it is simply wrong.

I suspect
there is an ulterior motive involved with why
you persistently continue to single me out to attack in
discussions

I think that you should be guided by the situation. Where posters attempt to hijack, of course the thread originator might object.

It was necessary dispel the basis of SR's post, lest 'whoppers' prevail, the illusory truth effect, and become the truth. That has been done. If anyone wants to pursue sex tourism he/she can start another thread.

Back to this thread.

leoj,

I was guided by the situation and only made one
comment. This is not a hijack. As any reasonable
person will agree.

SteeleRedux If you read my comment properly it was a sarcastic comment as to why the statement made by Mohamed El-Mouelhy would not achieve the desired effect because of there preference to under age girls.

That is not an attempt to change the thread.

Here is my original comment.
Quote
"His theory is flawed because as in the UK and other places where the Muslims are fervently seeding the female population it is with underage girls some as young as 10 years old."

leoj, it's pointless trying to keep this thread on topic because you chose such a retarded topic. One Muslim does a bit of trolling and you not only take the bait, but decide to help him!

If you really want to discuss things this dumb, I recommend you go to 4chan. Or there's plenty of other sites such as Reddit. But surely there are better things to discuss here?

Dear Philip,

Re-read your comment.
Perhaps then you will realise why SteeleRedux
was prompted to reply to you.
It isn't just Muslims that should be seen through
the prism of under age children.
Pedophiles exist in all cultures as Steele showed.
Hence his reply to you.

Dear Aidan,

Well said!

So long as the West values procreation, people like Mohamed can make a mockery of its "low achievements".

Such satire can be used as an opportunity for reflection and introspection: why are we still, in the 21st century and in an overcrowded and highly urbanised society, still value such primitive things as progeny? Why inflict an ever-increasing number of souls with having to live in this current unnatural, commercial and digital-electronic desert?

If nature itself helps us with the ecological response of reducing sperm-counts, we should only be grateful!

Foxy,

But in most societies molesting children is not encouraged.

Foxy Your argument does not hold up in this instance because Quote "Australian women need Muslims to 'fertilise them" notice the 4th word Muslims.

The originator of the comments does not suggest Australian women need any other culture so there is no need to bring them up.

Dear Philip,

As explained to you earlier- it was your comment on page
4 on underage girls that prompted Steele's response.
You were the one that brought it up so it must have been
relevant to you at the time.

Pedophiles exist in all cultures again as stated earlier -
not just amongst Muslims.

Dear Is Mise,

Most Muslims that I know do not encourage the sexual
abuse of children. Perhaps you're mixing with some
very undesirable people if you think otherwise.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4745378/Lefty-extremists-defend-Muslim-businessman-s-vile-remarks.html

"With friends like these ... Left-wing extremist group DEFENDS halal boss' claims Australian women need Muslim men to fertilise them - calling critics 'racist'"

Left-wing extremist group Antifa described his critics as 'bigots' and 'racists'
This is despite Sydney halal businessman calling on 'bigots' to commit suicide"

Dear Phillip S,

“SteeleRedux If you read my comment properly it was a sarcastic comment as to why the statement made by Mohamed El-Mouelhy would not achieve the desired effect because of there preference to under age girls.”

And you could have read my short two sentence reply as a sarcastic retort. But you didn't did you. Instead you asked for more information thus most certainly deemed to have diverted the thread. Guilty my I'm afraid. It is just lucky you are in leoj's good books otherwise you would be getting the sharp edge of his tongue. Just keep up the mozzie bashing and you will be fine.

"Antifa has defended the halal boss' call for Muslim men to fertilise Australian women

This is the same group which claimed responsibility in June for spraying conservative Sky News commentator Andrew Bolt with glitter at a book launch in Melbourne.

Less than eight weeks later, they are weighing into more controversy by defending Mr Elmouelhy"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4745378/Lefty-extremists-defend-Muslim-businessman-s-vile-remarks.html

Foxy,

Child marriage is endemic in Muslim culture, afterall the Prophet made it legal.
Homosexual paedophilia is quite normal among Afghan Muslims as well.
Have you found a definition for 'kill' yet?

SteeleRedux stating facts is not mozzie bashing except maybe in your interpretation.

Dear Is Mise,

Perhaps this may help you:

http://thoughtcatalog.com/daniel-hayes/2015/11/does-islam-really-say-its-okay-to-kill-people-or-is-that-just-one-interpretation/

Have a nice day.

Dear Phillip S,

You seem a little confused. Perhaps we need to clear this up. Where you making a sarcastic comment or stating a fact? I felt I was stating facts in response to your direct question.

Thanks for that, Foxy, it does shew that the Koran says that killing Infidels is OK.

Dear Is Mise,

Look at it in context.

You're smarter than that.

An interesting talk. Start 40secs in to avoid the lame introduction,

'Douglas Murray: Have We Had Enough Diversity?'

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ox-9OyvtJs

Leoj

I also recommend Douglas Murrays videos, He is wonderfully articulate and knows what
He is talking about.

As to the offensive statements regarding the Halal chief, why is 18C not being applied.
Seems they only harrass white people for saying such things.
This bloke is clearly stating all Australian men are alcoholics and drug takers.
All hell broke lose when Lynch posted that cartoon about the Aboriginals having a. Problem with alcohol.

Who'd want to have children with a man who has proven himself to be that stupid.
Women look for intelligence as a trait in their partners so they'll have intelligent offspring
not stupid ones.

Foxy,

I looked at it in context and here is part of what your link says:

"The quran is OK with killing people who deserve death, but it explicitly states that killing the “innocent” is completely forbidden. This is where people get misinformed, and how deception gets spread: The “innocent” is not what you think it is. The innocent by the definition given in the Quran are strict Muslims. It explicitly goes into detail about what makes you not innocent. If you believe in other religions or are atheist, you are not innocent. If you are unclean, eat banned foods, you are not innocent. If you do not abide by the sexual rules laid out in the Quran, you are not innocent. If you do not do your duty of prayer, fasting, and mosque attending, you are no innocent. So on and so forth. If you are not innocent, you are not protected by the book. In some regards you have a chance to become “innocent” and convert but if you do not you should not live– according the Quran. Many of the innocence breaking acts are immediately punishable by death.

There are over 100 verses in the Quran that deal with violence and killing the non-innocent. So yes, it actually says to kill people. It would be much more difficult to interpret the Quran as a peaceful book rather than a violent one. Muhammed himself had numerous people brutally killed because they spoke out against him."

Does kill mean to put to death or do you have an alternative meaning?

Dear Is Mise,

I can see that you did not look at the link in
context at all. You choose just the small part that
appealed to you - and not the explanations that
were given and their historical context.

Here is a little more from the same link:

"It's not about what your holy book says. It's
about how seriously and literally you take it. I
don't personally know any Jews who force their
women to live elsewhere during their period, or
stone anyone who's worked on the Sabbath, and for
that matter I know very few Christians who give unto
Caesar without bitching about it, or who turn the
other cheek."

"There's a great deal of focus lately on specific
passages in the Qur'an, but what's actually relevant
is what any given person makes of those passages.
You can find literalists and extremists in any
faith tradition, and will if you look hard enough."

cont'd ...

cont'd ...

Dear Is Mise,

I suggest that you go back to the link I gave and
read the Chapter, "Islam is no more violent
than Christianity and Judaism were."

"To paint all Muslims of today with broad strokes is as
fallacious as painting all of any other large group the
same way. There are over one and a half billion Muslims
in the world today spread through most of the world,
observing numerous denominations (or none). To suggest
they all read the Qur'an the same way is clearly
ignorant." If that were true, there would be only one
denomination."

"It is the same reason there are several different
Jewish denominations, and countless Christian ones.
They do not all agree on it, but instead have numerous
different interpretations."

"If you delve into ancient books of any Abrahamic
faith tradition or even just study their documented
history of the last milennia - you're going to find
a lot of blood."

"That is not specifically relevant to those living
in modern times. The vast majority of Jews, Christians,
and Muslims are not violent people and have no interest
in revisiting the barbarity of ancient times."

I suggest you go back and re-read the entire link
I cited earlier. Perhaps the second time around you will
get the message that is being given and not just select
what suits your personal viewpoint.

I have nothing further to add on this subject.

SteeleRedux - No confusion here as a sarcastic comment can also be based on fact.

In reply,

"The Muslim world wants White Knights, not critics
...
There is a simple reason why most Muslims prefer their White Knights instead of their critics: They believe that Islam is perfect and infallible.

Most Muslims believe that Islam as a religion can never be faulted for anything, and instead the fault lies with the way believers practise it. This means that it is the “moderates” who are not practising Islam the way it is meant to, by cherry-picking verses of the Quran and the Hadith, and by not taking holy texts literally."

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/opinion/zurairi-ar/article/the-muslim-world-wants-white-knights-not-critics#PxM67pOhTfvvxxRu.97

Foxy,

"To suggest
they all read the Qur'an the same way is clearly
ignorant."

What are their different definitions of 'kill'?

What's your definition?

Dear Is Mise,

As already stated. It's not about what your
Holy Book says. It's about how seriously
and literally you take it. You keep on
focusing on specific passages in the Qur'an,
and words like "kill." The vast majority
of Muslims are not violent people and have
no interest in revisiting the barbarity of
ancient times.

Foxy,

How does one define 'kill'?

Talk about a storm in a tea-cup. Obviously, if Western men have half of the sperm count of fifty years ago, the solution is to have twice as much sex. Lucky Aussie women indeed !

I'll take my lead from Foxy and have no more to do with this thread.

Joe

Joe,

Then that means that you'll be back?

I wonder how the Muslim men that have just been charged in Sydney with planning a terrorist attack interpret the Qu'ran and define 'kill'?

Interpretation's the problem, then and now.

'I wonder how the Muslim men that have just been charged in Sydney with planning a terrorist attack interpret the Qu'ran and define 'kill'?'

sure they were not Baptist. I mean Baird must be able to find a way to show that that Baptist are just as likely to carry a bomb into the airport than muslims. Then again secularist murder the unborn daily so that really gives them civilised position to judge from doesn't it?

Foxy said;
and have no interest
in revisiting the barbarity of ancient times."

But they are revisiting ancient times. Thousands of innocent victims
in western countries would attest to that if they were still alive.
How can you be so indifferent to what is happening in Europe ?
Cannot you see what is happening everywhere ?
It is no joke, people ARE dying almost EVERY day from Islamic action
in western countries. To say nothing of the ME.

Indeed, one person of interest was seen to attempt to check in some
baggage but it was rejected as too heavy. The person checking in
left.
The obvious suspicion is that it was an attempt to get a bomb on board.

Were we just lucky ?

I want to know which ones are the Aussie Women? The title, it seems, must be referring to aboriginal women. If that's the case then I'm OK with it. That sounds like a reasonable idea. If on the other hand they mean women in general then they are in for a big let down. The mix of Aussies today are predominantly descendants from migrants of every country in the world in other words they are born of mixed or foreign blood. Yes they were born in Australia but they are not 'Aussie'. Oh and by the way way I'm not sure who the pleb was that made the title or post, but, if the Muslim men want to s#!t on women, I have no idea to what end, they might not get the opportunity. (the last time I heard of someone fertilizing something they were throwing s#!t on plants or garden). On the other hand if they mean they want to inseminate or copulate then I get it. I know little about the bedroom antics of Muslims but what I do know is, after hearing comments from Aussie women who have dated Muslims, the men are too aggressive and overbearing for Aussie women and the women complained that their treatment was in most cases, second class and that the mens advances or how to interact with a woman, were guided by the Koran or Mohamed. The experience was not one of tenderness and loving advances, but more like one of master and servant. Whilst this method is acceptable in the Muslim ethos it will be received with disgust and condemnation in the Western culture. So unless the women are raped or have a really bad inferiority complex and feel the need to be punished by their husbands, for as long as they both shall live, (which shouldn't be too long for the women), then the question is as fanciful as my comment or reply.

It sounds to me that the moslems might be wanting to repair their
badly damaged genome.
What they probably do not understand is that it might take some
500 years.
I don't see Aussie women wanting to take on the higher risk of having
handicapped children.

Don't know about you ALTRAV, it's pretty easy to spot an aussie women, they're free, self confident and have choice.
Which puts a bit of a ding in the halal fools argument.
Did anyone hear the cretin on 2GB this arvo?

The news today says that the alleged terrorists in Sydney were also planning a possible chemical attack; gets interesting, the question seems to be not if, but when.

[Flounces back in, Left]

Hi Is Mise,

Not necessarily.

[Flounces back out, Right]

[And back in again]

In the spirit of friendly rivalry for each others' women, can I respectfully suggest that, while the 'non-Western' bloke is off down at Centrelink, his other 'wives/girlfriends' may be more amenable to the tender entreaties of 'Western men' to assist with the dissemination (good word) of their precious fluids. I'm all for inclusive multiculturalism :)

That's it, I've had my say.

[Flounces off yet again, Left]

ab-fab, a mixed race baby is the finest fashion accessory,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXjCXhP_Qqo

The mothers get to play dress-up too. On TV if they like,

New Hijab Wearer, "Hey, youse on the ABC, I've got this Hijab, right? So how's about a stint as guest from ya?"

ABC, "Well OK, but let us be clear that we are only interested in the Hijab as a personality and we'd be interviewing it not you". and,

"Er, could you perch a small goat on top of your head before you do the Hijab wrap up thing and use nice material, mind?"... "Because you are competing with some Big Hijabs and the biggest wins the door prize where (New, Progressive,) Aunty is concerned".

leoj,

Seeing as you're obviously into humour, goats, et cetera.

Here's a joke I'm sure you'll appreciate:

There was a bloke who used to live in Mallacoota
where he was so popular with the ladies,
he became known as the "Mallacoota Rooter."

But there was a bit of trouble so he moved to
Nambucca.

Dear Foxy,

Will people ever let up on me ?! You do so much, and then, one goat and it's all over town.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

What can I say?

You're the type of bloke ladies like to root,
blokes want to shoot or electrocute.
A top Aussie bloke.

Dearest Foxy,

I certainly like the first option, not to keen on the others. I knew I should have stayed in Mataranka, like most of the blokes on this thread. There goes the second option too.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Some mistakes are too much fun to only
make once.

As Errol Flynn once said, "It isn't what
they say about you, it's what they whisper."

What, only twice then ? If you're on a good thing, stick to it.

Whispering's not what I had in mind ;)