Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Captain Risky

Halal boss slammed over 'fertilise' remark

40 posts in this topic

7 hours ago, odas said:

Well, this all comes down to the freedom of speach and expression nowdays. When will be there consiquences for people like him, for people who abuse this freedom to hurt others? I am not only thinking of him but all racists, radicals, nazis, xenophobs..

At the begining was the word. Words hurt if not used properly. Stop them at the word, the root.

it is freedom of expression so in that sense he's done nothing really wrong other than be an instigator of discord. he is a scum and if there is any justice, he is not an Australian citizen and therefore eligible to be deported as an undesirable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Posted (edited)

On 06/08/2017 at 0:10 PM, Lilly said:

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has openly admitted that the Radical Extremists plan to have as many children as possible in order to eventually outnumber everyone else. Now, whether this is actually possible is another thing. Keep in mind China has a very large population. The Earth's population is currently at 7.5 billion people. Muslims of all sects are about 1.2 billion. The Radical Extremists are only a fraction of that 1.2 billion. I'd say KSM and the Radical Extremists have their work cut out for them.

Info on KSM: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Sheikh_Mohammed

Well, Mohamed Elmouelhy seems to subscribe to the "demographic conquest" philosophy. Does that make Elmouelhy a "Radical Extremist" ?

Because if it DOES, then we have to ask

  • How did he become a naturalised Australian citizen ? What does that say about the Australian immigration process ?
  • If he became head of the Halal Certification Authority, then clearly he is a respected figure in the muslim community. What does THAT says about the attitudes of the 'average' muslim, in Australia or around the world ?

On the OTHER hand, if he is NOT a "Radical Extremist", then we have to accept that the philosophy of the "Radical Extremists" is NOT "Radical" AT ALL, but is actually representative of mainstream thought among muslims.

Finally, it is worth noting that absolutely NOTHING was done about Elmouelhy's comments. He was not castigated by the board of the Halal Certification Authority, or by any other significant Islamic organisation, in Australia or elsewhere. (Bearing in mind that the Halal Certification Authority operates worldwide).

Actually, that's not entirely accurate; the press spokesman of the Islamic Council of Queensland DID tweet a criticism, but it was done in his private capacity, NOT as a spokesman for the Islamic Council, and it was very vague as to what parts of Elmouelhy's comments where 'wrong'. This is important, as it means that the condemning tweet represented a "private opinion", and hence did NOT imply that Elmouelhy's bigoted and supremacist statement contradicted Islamic orthodoxy, or was rejected by the Queensland muslim community.

Where was the condemnation from Al Azhar university, or the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia, or the Grand Ayotlloah of the Qom Seminary ?

So when is a "Radical Extremist" NOT a "Radical Extremist" ? Answer ... when he is Mainstream.

And vica versa.

 

Edited by RoofGardener
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 8/6/2017 at 3:39 AM, RoofGardener said:

Oh, and "AntiFa", the group supposedly against Fascism, have waded in, and stated that anyone who CRITICISES this man is a Racist and a Bigot, and that ".. more Muslim babies is a good thing..."

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

 

Just for clarification there is no global ANTIFA , just a group of people with loosely similar values who have used the name. Kind of like any douchebag with a rebellious streak was "Anonymous" last year. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Farmer77
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

1 hour ago, Farmer77 said:

Just for clarification there is no global ANTIFA , just a group of people with loosely similar values who have used the name. Kind of like any douchebag with a rebellious streak was "Anonymous" last year.

the tweet was from "Melbourne ANTIFA".

Surely you're not suggesting that social media could be WRONG ? :o

Edited by RoofGardener
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

the tweet was from "Melbourne ANTIFA".

Surely you're not suggesting that social media could be WRONG ? :o

LOL no , just pointing out that anyone can claim to be "ANTIFA" as there isnt a unified global group working under the same direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎8‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 4:24 AM, glorybebe said:

What the Hell is happening to society?

Globalism

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

LOL no , just pointing out that anyone can claim to be "ANTIFA" as there isnt a unified global group working under the same direction. 

I don't know man, it all pretty much looks the same to me. Same type of people doing the same crap. Using the same buzz words. From LA, to Germany and every where in between, the video's are nearly identical

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Farmer77 said:

LOL no , just pointing out that anyone can claim to be "ANTIFA" as there isnt a unified global group working under the same direction. 

They may not be very organized, but they are still flying under the same banner. This is what "they" are calling themselves.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Michelle said:

They may not be very organized, but they are still flying under the same banner. This is what "they" are calling themselves.

Indeed, an organization that went defunct in Europe about 60 years ago and never existed anywhere else in the world is suddenly all over the Western world.

Just a total coincidence, right? ^_^

 

What about this jerk from the OP?

Is he still torturing animals to death (halal) for a living? Is he still Lording it over his "fellow" Aussies and spreading his Hate?

Edited by AnchorSteam
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2017 at 1:24 AM, glorybebe said:

What the Hell is happening to society?

People are believing tabloids. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ChaosRose said:

People are believing tabloids. 

It's not just tabloids.  I have run into some people in my own life with attitudes similar just not as extreme as this guy.  It is scary and frustrating

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, glorybebe said:

It's not just tabloids.  I have run into some people in my own life with attitudes similar just not as extreme as this guy.  It is scary and frustrating

But...this story is from a tabloid. A lot of stories here are. Some are even from Russian propaganda outlets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/9/2017 at 7:55 AM, ChaosRose said:

People are believing tabloids. 

Honsetly, what is Tabloid, and what isn't these days?

They seem to merge, when you look at their methods  -

 

More "fake news"/"alternative facts" ??? whist.gif
WATCH: Photographer Explains How CBS Uses Color Adjustments To Make Steve Bannon ‘Look Bad’ On 60 Minutes
...
“It seems like 60 minutes would like you to listen less and look more at Steve Bannon. By subtly tweaking the color of the video, they make him look like a bleary-eyed drunk. I show you how they did it,” writes Duke on the video’s YouTube page.

Peter Duke has photographed Milo Yiannopoulos, Scott Adams and James O’Keefe.

In the video, Duke explains how CBS color adjusted Bannon’s shots to make his eyes and lips red by increasing the level of saturation. This results in curtains that are a brighter orange behind Bannon than they are in Charlie Rose’s shot. Rose’s shot was made “cooler,” to make the host’s make-up more subtle.

Duke then adjusted the interview’s lighting, removing Bannon’s redness and Rose’s “coolness.”
...
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...ad-60-minutes/

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody is hopping on the Personal Agenda train wreck ...

~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/08/2017 at 7:14 AM, and then said:

Maybe the women in OZ just need to read about Lorena Bobbit's technique for dealing with abusers.  :w00t:

It wasn't John Bobbitt who was the physical abuser. It was Lorena Bobbitt who was the physical abuser. Remarkable that she was let of scot-free for committing genital mutilation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.