This is why no more than a very small number of Muslims should be allowed to come to Australia.

Copy and paste this.

Europe’s “refugee” crisis and the Kalergi plan for white genocide - December 2016

What do we have here, yet another Muslim bashing thread. There is no evidence that the majority of Muslims in Australia, or those coming to Australia, have any track with terrorism at all, or with those that support terrorism, in fact they loudly condemn such barbarism. Moderate Muslims have as much to fear from terrorism and war, if not more, than does the rest of humanity, world events indicate that, with 470,000 killed in Syria alone, most of those Muslim non-combatants.
Unfortunately there is a small minority within the Islamic community, both here and throughout the world, who have been radicalized to the point where they actively seek to support terrorism. The best defense against this misguided radical minority, besides well organized counter terrorism forces, and a vigilant immigration policy, is to support the vast majority of Muslims who are opposed to radical action. Calls by vocal members of the hard right within Australia and overseas to ban and marginalize moderate Muslims only goes to radicalize more of the non terrorists supporting majority. If you want to increase acts of terrorism keep making theses outlandish demands. If we are going to defeat terrorism we need as many Muslims on side as possible

Increased Muslim numbers = trouble.

Story about some of the migrant problems in Germany for 2016.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9700/germany-islamization

Interesting how many times politicians or higher ups ordered things to be covered up so as not to identify perpetrators etc.

The problem is deeper than Islam. It began with the failure of the Aborigines to keep the monotheists away from the shores of this continent. The monotheists with the intolerance of monotheism gathered Aborigines into compounds where they compelled the Aborigines to replace their superstitions with the Christian superstition.

Perhaps, it would be for the best to restore polytheism. Then, the gullible and superstitious could worship whatever gods they wished to. There was a spirit of tolerance in the ancient world for those who worshipped other gods than that of the worshipper. Gods were not jealous of the worship of other gods. In general the ancient polytheistic religions did not prescribe morality. One worshipped and made sacrifices to the gods to obtain their favour. For morality one consulted the philosophers. Since there was no confusion of the philosophers with any deity one could take their opinions or leave them. The opinions of the philosophers were generally compatible with social reality and not eternally true so their views could change as the situation changed.

Jonathan Kirsch in “God Against the Gods” tells of the struggle between polytheism and monotheism in the ancient world. Here he tells of the role of the philosopher in antiquity:

“Yet another voice that could be heard, quite literally, in the market place of ancient Rome was that of the philosopher. Nowadays, philosophy has come to be regarded as an intellectual pastime that has nothing to do with the practice of religion—and nothing at all to do with real life. But the philosophers of pagan antiquity were the functional equivalent of what today we would call theologians: they pondered the beginning and ending of the world, the nature and destiny of humankind, the identity and will of the divine. For the same reason that some of the ancients found more spiritual meaning in the mystery religions than in the staid ceremonies of the official cults, others placed themselves under the tutelage of the philosophers who offered to reveal the arcane secrets of the cosmos.

continued

continued

Philosophy was fully as diverse as any other expression of paganism. Just as one might worship one or another of the many gods and goddesses, one might study and practice the teachings of the Stoics or the Epicureans, the Skeptics or the Cynics, the Peripatetics or the Pythagoreans or the Platonists. And, like, the mystery religions, the philosophers offered something that the priests in the official cults ignored-a concern for the happiness and fulfilment of the men and women who placed themselves under their tutelage. “[T]hey specialised in an activity that one could call in modern language pastoral care, life counselling or psychotherapy,” explains historian Hans-Josef Klauk. [Magic and Paganism in Early Christianity]

While the Pontifex Maximus and the lesser priests and priestesses of the official cults called upon the old gods and goddesses of the Greco-Roman pantheon to preserve the empire, the philosophers were offering advice to ordinary men and women about how to live a decent life. Here is another example of the moral and ethical concerns that were among the core values of classical paganism—the philosophers instructed their followers on “what is honourable and what is shameful, what is just and what is unjust,” according to one ancient orator, “how a man must bear himself in his relations with the gods, with his parents, with his elders, with the laws, with strangers, with those in authority, with friends, with women, with children with servants.”

continued

continued

The most accomplished philosophers held forth in the academies, the houses of wealthy patrons or the royal court—King Philip of Macedon set the standard when he engaged Aristotle as a tutor for his son, the future Alexander the Great—but others plied their trade in public, wandering from town to town and collected the odd coin in an outstretched bowl. Bearded, cloaked in a toga and holding a staff—the standard iconography of the working philosopher—they would deliver their oratory at the gates of a pagan temple, in the public baths or amid the bustle of the marketplace. Not unlike a standup comic, a philosopher had to work the crowd and cope with hecklers: “What, is a juggler coming on?” was one common taunt as reported by an ancient source. pp. 101-102”

One reason that monotheism won out was that it served well as a religion of rule. The monarch could maintain that he (Most rulers were male.) had divine sanction. Constantine favoured Christianity and established what A. N. Wilson called the ‘first totalitarian state”. Kirsch comments on this:

“As a ruthless campaigner and an expert intriguer, Constantine was perfectly willing and able to search out and punish anyone who challenged his political authority. Among his innovations, for example, was the establishment of the so-called agents in rebus, a corps of imperial courtiers who served as fixers, enforcers and informers. These “doers of things,” as the Latin phrase is rendered in literal English, functioned as the ancient equivalent of a secret police, and they came to be feared and loathed by the men and woman of all ranks and stations on whom they spied. The very existence of such apparatus of state security is what prompts biographer A. N. Wilson to characterize imperial Rome as “the first totalitarian state in history.”” [Paul: The Mind of the Apostle] p. 170

It would be good if Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Baha’i could all be replaced by a resurgent polytheism. It would be better to abandon superstition altogether.