I think the author has taken what Sonya Kruger actually said, way out of context, to suit his own agenda. Kruger had responded to a point that Japan has no problem with terrorists, as they haven't taken in a whole lot of Muslim migrants. That is in fact true and cannot be denied.

In the last 25 years or so, Australia has dramatically increased its intake of Muslims, so that their population has grown from 80'000 to half a million. There is talk of continuing this intake, which would see a dramatic rise of the Muslim population in Australia, given th fact that they also have a higher birth rate than non Muslim Australians. So the valid question arises, do we really want the same problems as France, Holland, Belgium and all the rest?

We already face a substantial anti terrorism cost, this with only 2% of our population being Muslim. It stands to reason that this would skyrocket, as their % increases.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali has written a great book about what Muslims need to do, to resolve the conflicts which Islam has with the West and solve the problems arising, from Muslims wanting to live in the West. She does so with a wealth of knowledge and expertise behind her and it would pay anyone who claims to be a thinker, to read what she has written on on the subject.

OzSpen quotes from the Qur’an the following verse to argue “core Islam promotes violence to unbelievers”

Quran 4:76 (Yusuf Ali translation), ‘Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who reject Faith Fight in the cause of Evil: So fight ye against the friends of Satan: feeble indeed is the cunning of Satan’.

What is missing is justification for OzSpen's interpretation (or what would be called tafsir in Islamic jurisprudence).

Muslims take their teachings, and in particular tafsir, from ulema (scholars) because the rest of us simply do not have the knowledge of the quran, of the historical context in which verses were revealed and of how the Prophet interpreted and responded to them. This is what is required to interpret verses such as 4:76 and what constitutes the 'teachings of Islam'.

Muslims, or non-Muslims, who do not take their interpretation from the ulema such as Mufti Shafi Usmani (whose tafsir I’ll be using) will lead themselves and others astray.

When the Mufti Usmani quotes the verse 4:76 in his tafsir, he combines it with the preceding verse (4:75) as follows:

What has happened to you that you do not fight in the way of Allah and for the oppressed among men, women and children who say, "Our Lord, take us out from this town whose people are cruel. And make for us from Your own a supporter, and make for us from Your own a helper." [75] Those who believe fight in the way of Allah and those who disbelieve fight in the way of right? So, fight the friends of Satan. No doubt, the guile of Satan is feeble. [76]

The town referenced is Mecca. The Mufti’s tafsir, or interpretation, is as follows:

cont...

Susanonline

To answer your question regards the author suggesting that ONE NATION voters leave Australia, it is contained within:

"It does make me wonder, if they increasingly don’t like this country and the direction that it is headed in, then why don’t they just move and try their luck elsewhere"

This is opposite to the article by Br. Amir Abdullah, in which he suggests that Muslims leave Australia.

"If we have it within our means we should therefore consider moving to a Muslim land whereby we can at least live amongst our brethren and within an Islamic society free from the contamination of the disbelievers."

http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/preserveident.htm

This suggestion by Br. Amir Abdullah in his article comes after he laments that Muslims in Australia are being corrupted by a 'Kuffar' education system

For example:

"The children are placed in an environment where the mixing of sexes is not only tolerated but encouraged through the placement of children in multi-gender sporting teams and class groups. These children grow up to believe such behaviour is normal."

And:

"Every subject taught to the Muslim has a hidden agenda - to foster disbelief and moral decline."

I wonder if the Australian National University also has mixed classes and teaches moral decline?

He also laments the news media:

"The news provides us with an insight into the world around us. A world where Mujahideen are called 'terrorists', where the Straight Path is called ' Islamic fundamentalism',"

He also laments having to mix with non-Muslims:

"Furthermore, the best protection is to keep amongst other Muslims. Whilst it is a necessity for some contact with the Kuffar, we should limit it to the bare minimum and make sincere efforts to offset it with contact with other Muslims."

So there could be conflict and argument occurring within the Muslim community as to whether they should attempt integration, or remain separate and isolated...or leave Australia.

cont..

The Mufti’s tafsir, or interpretation, is as follows:

“Left behind in Makkah were Muslims who were unable to migrate because of physical weakness and insufficiency of resources. Later on, the disbelievers themselves stopped them from going and started hurting and harassing them in all sorts of ways so that they turn away from their faith in Islam. The names of some of these are preserved in exegetic works, for example, Sayyidna Ibn 'Abbas and his mother, Sulyma ibn Risham, Walid ibn Walid and AbL Jandal ibn Sahl, may Allah be pleased with them all (Qurtubi). These blessed people kept facing tyranny and torture because of their unflinching faith showing no signs that they would ever surrender their firm stand on Islam. However, they did continue praying to Allah Almighty for deliverance from this hard life which was finally accepted by Him when He commanded Muslims to wage Jihad against the disbelievers and rescue the oppressed from their coercion and persecution.”
Source: Maariful Quran by Mufti Shafi Usmani, p502, https://ia802707.us.archive.org/2/items/maarifulquran-english-pdf/MaarifulquranEnglishPdf-Vol2-Page001-672ByMuftiShafiUsmaniRah.pdf

So in this verse the fight is against those “oppressed among men, women and children” by a ruler of a properly constituted government. No such war has been declared (in fact Muslim governments have declared war on ISIS!) and even if it had this would not provide justification for Muslims committing acts of violence against non-Muslims whether in Muslim of non-Muslims lands.

For the Sharia rulings relating to acts of aggression of Muslims towards non-Muslims, read “Chapter 10 Muslims in Non-Muslim countries” and “Chapter 11 Non-Muslims in Muslim countries” of “Refuting ISIS: A Rebuttal of Its Religious and Ideological Foundations”, by Shaykh Muhammad al-Yaqoubi.
https://ia601307.us.archive.org/13/items/RefutingISIS/Refuting%20ISIS.pdf.

In short, for numerous reasons these acts of violence committed in the name of Islam in fact are violation of the Shariah and have no place in Islam, legally or historically.

Once again, we see the pattern developing. Those ever shrinking circle of people on OLO who are willing to go into bat for Islamic Immigration, limit themselves to superficial arguments and sneery one liners. While the ever growing numbers of people on OLO who oppose Islamic immigration, submit long and detailed reasons why Islamic immigration into western societies must be banned.

Analysing the superficial arguments of those who see nothing wrong with Islamic immigration, their arguments seem to be based upon a particular philosophy. That is, that all people are basically good. It is only a few people in any society who are basically bad. Therefore, everybody from every race and culture can live together in peace and harmony if all of them just ignore the baddies in their own particular societies. 'By "baddies" that mean ISIS, the Ku Klux Klan, One Nation supporters, the Khmer Rouge, Israelis, Donald Trump, and Gert Weelders.

Of course, simply turning on the TV news every night and looking at the ethnic and religious violence going on all around the world, should dispel that 1960's flower child thinking. But some people like Susieonline seem to be trapped in a time warp.

Reality is catching up in the form of ever increasing mass murder attacks upon ordinary people in France, Germany, Brussels, London, Madrid, Sydney, and many other places around the world. We have to thank the Muslim world for displaying how stupid was the idea is that people with diametrically opposed cultural values can live together without serious social problems.

Susie is on the wrong side of history here. Her charming philosophy is out of date, and her efforts to explain to others that they must keep the faith, look more and more pathetic as time goes by. She gives the appearance of a Creationist who simply ignores the museums full of fossils that clearly display that their theories are wrong. Faith in multiculturalism is being eroded with every new terrorist outrage perpetuated by imported foreigners into western countries who took the perfectly admirable western value of tolerance way too far.

I will go to bat for further Muslim immigration, particularly single females not enamoured with their current prospects or rigid controls, or lack of personal freedom!

Just not the untested model we have now!

To be sure there are some bad and mad people in our midst, who wish and would do us harm! Not all of them are Muslim!

What we have and fail to deploy is space age lie detection technology, which when deployed, if ever? Will stop these few folk dead in their tracks, sometimes literally!

Sort the wheat from the chaff so to speak, or give us an opportunity to enforce Mr Amir Abdullah's advice, and ensure these troublesome folks take up his preferred option and a one way plane ticket, as a "permanent solution" and at the earliest opportunity! Failing that, incarceration and fully tested (proven) re-education

As for non muslims who long to or would do us harm? We have other options, once of which is a frontal lobotomy and still useful life, albeit reduced to a robot status on a prison farm just following simple orders and a structured routine, for the term of a natural life?

Yes they do have rights, one of which doesn't include doing other folk lethal harm! And essentially preventable!

Imagine i.e., if we could have known what was really on Mr Bryant's moribund mind before he massacred all those entirely innocent people at Port Arthur, all those years ago!?

His attempts to obtain automatic firearms ought to have resulted in an mandatory red flag and obligatory space age lie detection testing, followed by a frontal lobotomy!

An ounce of prevention being worth a ton of cure! Not done by the simplistic notion of removing certain categories of firearms, and just not doable, when what we need to remove as neighbors are folks with an inherent, murderous, antisocial bent! Muslim and non Muslim!
Alan B.