Australia to tighten immigration laws in counterterror bid

[simple1]

Being a democractic society it was debated; a decision reached it would be contrary to the Constitution i.e. establishing a parallel legal system. Private 'cultural' arrangements are not recognised by the Courts in Australia

Nice try at deflection. No one mentioned Courts.

A simple question. Are aspects of Sharia Law being practiced in Australia ? A 1 word answer will suffice.

deflection? just confirming not recognised under Australian law.

yes some for civil matters such as marriages & I assume some business matters between Muslims. Same applies to some Jews in Australia who practise Beth Din for family and business matters within their community. I have Thai Buddhist friends who marry at a Wat, they make business arrangements within their community outside of the Australian legal system.

There was no need to confirm it was not recognised under Australian Law. That is not in question, by me or anyone else.

I do not think that Jews or Buddhists are the reason that Australian is having to revise / amend its Anti-Terror Laws, as per the topic, so why the need to mention them ? More deflection perhaps ?

Yes, elements of Sharia Law are taking place in Australia. Contrary to the Laws of the Land and against the constitution as you put it. Which then begs the question as to why it is not stamped on immediately.

I will give you a 1 word answer. Appeasement. Just like I said months ago, when I said that I hoped that Australia would not follow in the steps of the UK.

One word answer - rubbish

[JockPieandBeans]

Nice try at deflection. No one mentioned Courts.

A simple question. Are aspects of Sharia Law being practiced in Australia ? A 1 word answer will suffice.

deflection? just confirming not recognised under Australian law.

yes some for civil matters such as marriages & I assume some business matters between Muslims. Same applies to some Jews in Australia who practise Beth Din for family and business matters within their community. I have Thai Buddhist friends who marry at a Wat, they make business arrangements within their community outside of the Australian legal system.

There was no need to confirm it was not recognised under Australian Law. That is not in question, by me or anyone else.

I do not think that Jews or Buddhists are the reason that Australian is having to revise / amend its Anti-Terror Laws, as per the topic, so why the need to mention them ? More deflection perhaps ?

Yes, elements of Sharia Law are taking place in Australia. Contrary to the Laws of the Land and against the constitution as you put it. Which then begs the question as to why it is not stamped on immediately.

I will give you a 1 word answer. Appeasement. Just like I said months ago, when I said that I hoped that Australia would not follow in the steps of the UK.

One word answer - rubbish

Which part is rubbish, as you put it ?

Rubbish is not an answer to anything.

If you wish to refute anything that I have said above, go right ahead. Highlight what you wish to refute and provide evidence to back up your objection.

'' Rubbish '' as an answer, is nothing more that the utterings of a spoiled child who does not have any answers.

[simple1]

There was no need to confirm it was not recognised under Australian Law. That is not in question, by me or anyone else.

I do not think that Jews or Buddhists are the reason that Australian is having to revise / amend its Anti-Terror Laws, as per the topic, so why the need to mention them ? More deflection perhaps ?

Yes, elements of Sharia Law are taking place in Australia. Contrary to the Laws of the Land and against the constitution as you put it. Which then begs the question as to why it is not stamped on immediately.

I will give you a 1 word answer. Appeasement. Just like I said months ago, when I said that I hoped that Australia would not follow in the steps of the UK.

One word answer - rubbish

Which part is rubbish, as you put it ?

Rubbish is not an answer to anything.

If you wish to refute anything that I have said above, go right ahead. Highlight what you wish to refute and provide evidence to back up your objection.

'' Rubbish '' as an answer, is nothing more that the utterings of a spoiled child who does not have any answers.

Australia has not enacted or planning to enact legal recognition for Sharia Civil Law, so no act of "appeasement".

Perhaps you can explain how enacting legislation to specifically ban and have penalties for the practise of Sharia Civil law will contribute to a reduction of possible terrorist incidents

[JockPieandBeans]

There was no need to confirm it was not recognised under Australian Law. That is not in question, by me or anyone else.

I do not think that Jews or Buddhists are the reason that Australian is having to revise / amend its Anti-Terror Laws, as per the topic, so why the need to mention them ? More deflection perhaps ?

Yes, elements of Sharia Law are taking place in Australia. Contrary to the Laws of the Land and against the constitution as you put it. Which then begs the question as to why it is not stamped on immediately.

I will give you a 1 word answer. Appeasement. Just like I said months ago, when I said that I hoped that Australia would not follow in the steps of the UK.

One word answer - rubbish

Which part is rubbish, as you put it ?

Rubbish is not an answer to anything.

If you wish to refute anything that I have said above, go right ahead. Highlight what you wish to refute and provide evidence to back up your objection.

'' Rubbish '' as an answer, is nothing more that the utterings of a spoiled child who does not have any answers.

Australia has not enacted or planning to enact legal recognition for Sharia Civil Law, so no act of "appeasement".

Perhaps you can explain how enacting legislation to specifically ban and have penalties for the practise of Sharia Civil law will contribute to a reduction of possible terrorist incidents

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse or just deny and deflect something that is no longer deniable and is beyond deflection ?

Your whole post above is nothing more than a desperate attempt at deflection.

I would rip it to shreds if I could be bothered. Nowhere in any of my posts have I suggested anything to the tripe that you have just posted above.

So let me make this clear. So that there is no misunderstandings,

Australia is having to review and amend their current Anti-terrorist laws as they are no longer adequate for their original purpose. This is due to one group of people, Muslims. Not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or any others.

Sharia Law is contrary to Australian Law and the Australian Constitution. I could post link after link of cases where Sharia Law is being implemented in Australia, I do not need to, you already know what they are.

With a Muslim population of less than 500,000, why is Sharia Law still taking place when it is contrary to Australian Law and the Constitution ?

That is called '' Appeasement ''

I'm pretty sure with your leanings, the truth hurts and you will still have a bash at denial and deflection.

[MrWorldwide]

Australia needed this long before Monis - somewhere in the 1970s when someone in Canberra had the bright idea to take people from a civil war in Lebanon and resettle them in Oz. The Vietnamese also came from a war zone, and had their share of issues initially, but those that persevered have found their niche and live alongside other Australians without conflict - the Lebanese have never been a good cultural fit for Australia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebanese_Australian

Following the outbreak of the Lebanese Civil War in 1975, more than 20,000 civil war refugees arrived in Australia.^[10] This wave of migrants were often poor and for the first time, over half of them were Muslim.^[10] This influx of new migrants changed the character of the established Lebanese community in Australia significantly, especially in Sydney where 75% of the Lebanese-born population were concentrated.^[10]

For the remainder of the 1970s and 1980s, unrest in Lebanon caused a large increase in the number of Lebanese migrating to Australia, continuing with a significant proportion being comprised by Muslims.

In 1991, there were 68,787 people who were first generation immigrants born in Lebanon and 67,453 second generation people associated with Lebanon as a birthplace.^[11

[Scott]

A post containing a deliberate misspelling of a politician's name has been removed.

[simple1]

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse or just deny and deflect something that is no longer deniable and is beyond deflection ?

Your whole post above is nothing more than a desperate attempt at deflection.

I would rip it to shreds if I could be bothered. Nowhere in any of my posts have I suggested anything to the tripe that you have just posted above.

So let me make this clear. So that there is no misunderstandings,

Australia is having to review and amend their current Anti-terrorist laws as they are no longer adequate for their original purpose. This is due to one group of people, Muslims. Not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or any others.

Sharia Law is contrary to Australian Law and the Australian Constitution. I could post link after link of cases where Sharia Law is being implemented in Australia, I do not need to, you already know what they are.

With a Muslim population of less than 500,000, why is Sharia Law still taking place when it is contrary to Australian Law and the Constitution ?

That is called '' Appeasement ''

I'm pretty sure with your leanings, the truth hurts and you will still have a bash at denial and deflection.

Sounds like you personally want government to enact legislation to make any private arrangement under Sharia Civil Law an offense with some form of punishment/s. Personally I do not concur with this path.

You can disagree, but pull your head in with the personal attacks.

[JockPieandBeans]

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse or just deny and deflect something that is no longer deniable and is beyond deflection ?

Your whole post above is nothing more than a desperate attempt at deflection.

I would rip it to shreds if I could be bothered. Nowhere in any of my posts have I suggested anything to the tripe that you have just posted above.

So let me make this clear. So that there is no misunderstandings,

Australia is having to review and amend their current Anti-terrorist laws as they are no longer adequate for their original purpose. This is due to one group of people, Muslims. Not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or any others.

Sharia Law is contrary to Australian Law and the Australian Constitution. I could post link after link of cases where Sharia Law is being implemented in Australia, I do not need to, you already know what they are.

With a Muslim population of less than 500,000, why is Sharia Law still taking place when it is contrary to Australian Law and the Constitution ?

That is called '' Appeasement ''

I'm pretty sure with your leanings, the truth hurts and you will still have a bash at denial and deflection.

Sounds like you personally want government to enact legislation to make any private arrangement under Sharia Civil Law an offense with some form of punishment/s. Personally I do not concur with this path.

You can disagree, but pull your head in with the personal attacks.

Sharia Law has no place in a Democratic Society. Those that wish to follow Sharia, can do so, in a Country that conforms to Sharia. It is my opinion that anyone should be prosecuted for carrying out any form of Sharia, whether that be Australia, NZ, the UK or any other Country that is not a Sharia Country.

I get it that you do not concur with my viewpoint. I doubt that there would be a Muslim on the planet that would. And that is one part of the problem. A large % of the Muslim population think that they can do what they want, when they want, wherever they want. Regardless of what others think.

Personal attacks ? You think I attacked you ? I made a strong argument of you trying to twist my words, if you think that is a personal attack, you are sorely mistaken.

Having said all that, I see that you still have not backed up your '' Rubbish '' claim.

[simple1]

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse or just deny and deflect something that is no longer deniable and is beyond deflection ?

Your whole post above is nothing more than a desperate attempt at deflection.

I would rip it to shreds if I could be bothered. Nowhere in any of my posts have I suggested anything to the tripe that you have just posted above.

So let me make this clear. So that there is no misunderstandings,

Australia is having to review and amend their current Anti-terrorist laws as they are no longer adequate for their original purpose. This is due to one group of people, Muslims. Not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or any others.

Sharia Law is contrary to Australian Law and the Australian Constitution. I could post link after link of cases where Sharia Law is being implemented in Australia, I do not need to, you already know what they are.

With a Muslim population of less than 500,000, why is Sharia Law still taking place when it is contrary to Australian Law and the Constitution ?

That is called '' Appeasement ''

I'm pretty sure with your leanings, the truth hurts and you will still have a bash at denial and deflection.

Sounds like you personally want government to enact legislation to make any private arrangement under Sharia Civil Law an offense with some form of punishment/s. Personally I do not concur with this path.

You can disagree, but pull your head in with the personal attacks.

Sharia Law has no place in a Democratic Society. Those that wish to follow Sharia, can do so, in a Country that conforms to Sharia. It is my opinion that anyone should be prosecuted for carrying out any form of Sharia, whether that be Australia, NZ, the UK or any other Country that is not a Sharia Country.

I get it that you do not concur with my viewpoint. I doubt that there would be a Muslim on the planet that would. And that is one part of the problem. A large % of the Muslim population think that they can do what they want, when they want, wherever they want. Regardless of what others think.

Personal attacks ? You think I attacked you ? I made a strong argument of you trying to twist my words, if you think that is a personal attack, you are sorely mistaken.

Having said all that, I see that you still have not backed up your '' Rubbish '' claim.

Final response.

I am not a follower of the Islamic faith, I have not 'twisted' your words, that's your speciality to make false accusations.

To repeat one last time. Your claim of appeasement by the Australian government regards the Islamic world is nonsense as clearly indicated by the actions being taken both domestically and internationally by government.

[JockPieandBeans]

Are you deliberately trying to be obtuse or just deny and deflect something that is no longer deniable and is beyond deflection ?

Your whole post above is nothing more than a desperate attempt at deflection.

I would rip it to shreds if I could be bothered. Nowhere in any of my posts have I suggested anything to the tripe that you have just posted above.

So let me make this clear. So that there is no misunderstandings,

Australia is having to review and amend their current Anti-terrorist laws as they are no longer adequate for their original purpose. This is due to one group of people, Muslims. Not Christians, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists or any others.

Sharia Law is contrary to Australian Law and the Australian Constitution. I could post link after link of cases where Sharia Law is being implemented in Australia, I do not need to, you already know what they are.

With a Muslim population of less than 500,000, why is Sharia Law still taking place when it is contrary to Australian Law and the Constitution ?

That is called '' Appeasement ''

I'm pretty sure with your leanings, the truth hurts and you will still have a bash at denial and deflection.

Sounds like you personally want government to enact legislation to make any private arrangement under Sharia Civil Law an offense with some form of punishment/s. Personally I do not concur with this path.

You can disagree, but pull your head in with the personal attacks.

Sharia Law has no place in a Democratic Society. Those that wish to follow Sharia, can do so, in a Country that conforms to Sharia. It is my opinion that anyone should be prosecuted for carrying out any form of Sharia, whether that be Australia, NZ, the UK or any other Country that is not a Sharia Country.

I get it that you do not concur with my viewpoint. I doubt that there would be a Muslim on the planet that would. And that is one part of the problem. A large % of the Muslim population think that they can do what they want, when they want, wherever they want. Regardless of what others think.

Personal attacks ? You think I attacked you ? I made a strong argument of you trying to twist my words, if you think that is a personal attack, you are sorely mistaken.

Having said all that, I see that you still have not backed up your '' Rubbish '' claim.

Final response.

I am not a follower of the Islamic faith, I have not 'twisted' your words, that's your speciality to make false accusations.

To repeat one last time. Your claim of appeasement by the Australian government regards the Islamic world is nonsense as clearly indicated by the actions being taken both domestically and internationally by government.

I do not care what faith you follow, that is your business and yours alone. However, for someone who claims to not be a follower of the Islamic Faith, you sure get your panties in a twist trying to defend it.

You have not twisted my words ? Try re-reading the last 20 posts on this thread.

Aspects of Sharia Law is being practised is Australia. Fact.

That would be contrary to both Australian Law and the Constitution. Fact.

So, if my use of the word '' Appeasement '' is incorrect. What word would you use to describe the blatant disregard for Australian Law and Constitution by tolerating aspects of Sharia Law being practiced on Australian soil ?

[i claudius]

Tougher immegration laws in Britain would mean ,British guys would not be allowed to take their Thai wives there. but open doors for terrorists.

[JockPieandBeans]

Tougher immegration laws in Britain would mean ,British guys would not be allowed to take their Thai wives there. but open doors for terrorists.

Sorry.

Did you post this on the wrong thread ?

As things stand today, there seems to be a load of guys having difficulty in getting there Thai wives to the UK, but the doors seem to be wide open to all sorts of terrorists.