Yuyutsu, Whatever is written in Islamic scripture is considered by ALL Islamic clerics to be the literal word of Allah, because Mohammed said it was what Allah told him to say & do. Mohammed also is considered by ALL Islamic clerics to be the perfect human being who must be emulated.

Dear Imacentristmoderate,

Of course that's what all Islamic clerics say (well otherwise they would lose their jobs and positions), but who cares about their considerations? that's all besides the issue, which is what you wrote to Bazz:

"Allah's intention is then crystal clear, total war by any & all means until all humanity is serving Allah."

So apparently this is what YOU think, apparently you take it for a fact!

And what are you basing this view on? Just those same books?

- I deny that.

Yes, I also think that Muhammad, peace be upon him, was a perfect human being, but sadly we have no credible accounts left about him, his teachings and his life and those books about him which the Muslim clerics use were faked at least 160 years after his death.

Following on from imacentristmoderate’s posts, it is important to note that the Moslem cult holds the following core belief governing its intention towards the rest of us (whom the Moslems regard as unbelievers or “Kafirs”):

There is no God but Allah, and Mohammed is his prophet.

It is binding on all followers of the cult that they base their lives on that of the murderous warlord Mohammed. Those who flock overseas to butcher male unbelievers and rape and enslave captured women, or who murder their betters on our own streets, are dutifully patterning themselves literally on their phoney “prophet”.

Where civilised countries import Moslem Fifth Columns, they will persistently chip away at freedom, recruiting “dhimmis” to tansmit their message among the Kafir populations, concentrating on Kafirs who have the ear of Kafir compatriots. The intended outcome is slavery, even if it takes generations to enforce.

The entire programme is well known, but the structure of their “holy books” precludes comprehension without extended, patient study. Fortunately many scholars have studied the books and boiled them down into comprehensible form. The result isn’t pretty. To get the gist of it I have downloaded from Amazon Kindle the short volume “ The Story of Mohammed” in which Harry Richardson outlines the history of Mohammed from desert banditry around Mecca and Medina to launching a war against unbelievers in ever-widening regions to the present day when it’s world-wide and embraces Australia.

Richardson draws entirely on Moslem holy texts and on interpretations of Islamic scholars revered in the Moslem world. Anyone who believes sh/e knows enough about Islam not to need to look more deeply should download this book and devote an hour or two treading it critically.

Can we stem the tide? Not if we listen uncritically to appeasers. I’ll follow up with some pointers to what it seems to me can be done.

Dear Julian,

There is no reason why Muslims should not follow their good prophet.

The prophet was not phoney, only his history and teachings were completely faked in later generations by a bloodthirsty cult.

The remedy is to show Muslims that in order to follow their beloved prophet they should stop looking at the books of that cult.

Yuyutsu, it's possble that Mohammed was succeeded by even worse Moslems - Abu Bakr seems to have led the continent-wide orgy of invasion, murder and enslavement that followed Mohammed's death. Yet there's the record of Moslems systematically slaughtering scores of Jews to entertain the "prophet" and his child bride Aisha as they made themselves comfortable and watched. The bloodshed went on all day. Not the sort we want as immigrants.

To get an idea of what Richardson's book is about, go to http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19440419-the-story-of-mohammed-islam-unveiled and select [more] to continue the synopsis. It's an eye-opener that will specially disturb appeasers.

Can this existential threat to decency in the free world be turned back?

Well it's later than most people think. We should have jumped on Islam's finger when it first appeared under the door, and now its hands are reaching for our throats. Already, as Richardson reports, people in Australia are facing gaol for utterances which the Moslem juggernaut finds offensive. Significantly, truth is not an admissible defence. Appeasers should think about it!

An actual challenge to Islamic tyranny and to Kafir dhimmitude (Google it) will start to turn the assault back. This new outfit, Australian Liberty Alliance, may have some promise. Geert Wilders not speaking cringing apologetics may help raise resistance as it has in Holland. Banning walking bodybags won’t help. Expelling Moslems en masse is not an option. But the migration laws could be amended to require that everyone entering Australia to declare that s/he will uphold the right of every person to choose or reject or leave a religion, to obey or disobey a religion’s prescriptions, to revere, question or openly deride anybody’s “holy” figure or symbol. Anyone who demonstrates later that his or her pledge wasn’t dinkum (e.g. taqiyya) to be kicked out of the country for good.

And for the Syrian “refugees”, accept only Yazidis - there are 230 thousand of them.

//Yet there's the record of Moslems systematically slaughtering scores of Jews to entertain the "prophet" and his child bride Aisha as they made themselves comfortable and watched. The bloodshed went on all day. Not the sort we want as immigrants.//

Mere scores? In 1096, German Christians slaughtered thousands of Jews during the Rhineland massacres. In 1506, Portugese Christians tortured, murdered and burnt at the stake hundreds of people who were accused of being Jews (even though they had been forcibly converted to Christianity).

Definitely not the sort we want as immigrants. Maybe we should only import atheists, pantheists and polytheists? Actually, scratch the polytheists: the Thuggee were polytheistic and they were probably the most murderous cult the world has ever seen*. Just atheists and pantheists then, although I'm sure one of our local Christian apologists will drop by shortly to remind us of all the people that the Godless commies murdered.

So it looks like we don't get to have any immigrants, at least if we're to go around banning them for past atrocities committed by other members of their faith or lack thereof. Hmm, maybe not such a good basis for determining immigration policy...

*Not in absolute terms, the Christians and Muslims probably both have them beat hands down, but the whole cult was explicitly devoted to the practice of cold-blooded murder. Interestingly, the British Raj did not round up and execute all Hindus for the crimes of the Thuggee; they just went after the Thuggee. Perhaps some of the people around here who are quick to condemn the whole religion for the actions of a minority of murderous nutjobs could learn a thing or two from the Raj's approach to the Thuggee problem.