‘Burqa Bandits’ Weren’t Even Wearing Burqas! LOL

How many burqa bank robberies have there been in Australia? None.

How many people have been arrested for going into toilets and changerooms and sitting there, perving? None.

How many people have committed a crime in Australia whilst wearing a burqa? Just the one – Carnita Matthews. She falsely accused a police officer of being racist. Could this crime have been committed by a person NOT wearing a burqa? Yes. What do you think Carnita’s punishment for this heat-of-the-moment brain explosion? SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT. The judge wanted to ‘send a message to the ‘community”. What was that message do you think? And which community was he referring to? The burqa wearing community of Australia? The community that currently has ZERO crimes to its name?

Hmm.

Racists LOVE denying that they’re racists because attacking Muslims is not racist because Islam is a crime.

Bogan no.1: I hate Muslims.
Antibogan: You’re racist.
Bogan no.1: It’s not racist because Islam isn’t a race, it’s a religion.
Bogan no.2: Fuck off back to your own shitty third world country you greasy beak-nosed dune coon sand nigger terrorist scum.
Bogan no.1: Yeah fuck off back to your own country Muslims.

And bogans love talking about this burqa-banning issue as a matter of high importance as though burqa-clad Muslim women are some kind of security threat. (How many bombs have been discovered or have been blown up in Australia? I’ll tell you. None). And all these people can do is quote random burqa-related crimes from other countries, like they are somehow commonplace. The number of burqa-related crimes can be counted on one hand. Even the most savvy of bogan-Google-detectives will eventually confirm this. But take a look at the Youtube clip above. It was provided by Linda Thoms:

And here’s her link, screenshotted:

But WAIT A MINUTE! The criminals aren’t even wearing burqas! They are wearing flowery Sunday School church dresses with handmade hoodies over their heads! How would these douchebags double as burqa wearing Muslim women? And the ironic point, once again, is that they were already committing the crime. Their so-called burqas didn’t help them any more than a clown outfit would, or a beekeeper uniform, or a deep-sea diving suit, or a jumpsuit with a balaclava.

But sure, let’s ban the burqa, because as soon as it has been banned, this plethora of burqa-related crime will cease. Oh wait… Marijuana is banned, but people still smoke it. Handguns are banned, but people still get shot. Rape has been banned, but people still do it. If we ban the burqa to end burqa-related crime (remember, not even more than a handful of instances in the Western world), will criminals stop and re-think whether or not they’ll wear one when they rob the jewelry store? Nope.

Here is Linda Thoms again:

Suuuure Linda. Your Muslim neighbour’s friend. As if you have a Muslim neighbour. And as if you would ever try getting into a conversation long enough with them for them to tell you about their friend’s boat that has ‘Jew Hunter’ painted onto it. You’ve got to watch those luxury yachts – always hunting Jews and other kinds of people down…

These racists have no leg to stand on, yet constantly think they’re in the majority and that when they laugh, the world laughs with them.

Take a look at Daniel. The few random burqa-related crime examples that have been provided by the bogans themselves have been committed by men, yet Daniel thinks it is ‘sexit’ to point this out. Not only that, but the BTB character below thinks that makes people who oppose draconian clothing bans based on pretense ‘hypocrites’!

_____________________________________

And then there’s Fiona. People like Fiona are the types who are drumming up this consistent negative attention for women who wear the burqa, yet call these Muslims ‘hypocrites… GUILTY of DISCRIMINATION’ when they defend their practice as being more moral than those who strut around in skimpy G-strings. Fiona, sexual attraction is decreased when a woman wears a burqa, and that’s why Muslim women call it modesty. Negative attention is created and increased by people like you who turn their freedom of choice on its arse by supporting people who suggest that Muslim women only wear burqas to hide bombs and guns.

38 thoughts on “‘Burqa Bandits’ Weren’t Even Wearing Burqas! LOL

  1. I always wonder if these people calling for a ban are also the same people who come out when young women are raped and say they should not dress provocotavely.

    • “Girls!! When will you learn! At 3am when you are blind drunk & you decide to go home with a guy ITS NOT FOR A CUP OF MILO! Allegedly……”?

      Australian society: Respecting women by raping them, one at a time.

  2. “How many burqa bank robberies have there been in Australia? I’ll tell you: NONE”

    And how many have been done by people wearing motorcycle helmets?
    Or Halloween masks?
    The fact is, you cannot enter a bank with your face covered, *except* if you’re a Muslim in a burqa.

    “Bogans and racists LOVE denying that they’re racists because attacking Muslims is not racist because Islam is a crime.”

    No, because it’s not a race.
    It’s a religion.

    “How many bombs have been discovered or have been blown up in Australia?”

    So we have to wait until someone *does* blow up a few dozen people before we even consider the *potential* problem.

    There are plenty of laws about things that are probabilistically unlikely to happen.
    You don’t have to wait until they do happen.

    “The number of burqa-related crimes can be counted on one hand.”

    So those victims don’t count.
    Jack the Ripper only killed *a few* prostitutes. Come on, give the guy a break!

    “Their so-called burqas didn’t help them anymore than a clown outfit would, or a beekeeper uniform, or a deep-sea diving suit, or a jumpsuit with a balaclava.”

    They didn’t help them commit the crime.
    The point is they help not being *identified* afterwards.

    “Suuuure Linda. Your Muslim neighbour’s friend. As if you have a Muslim neighbour.”

    Like she has any control over who moves into her street.

    “And as if you would ever try getting into a conversation long enough with them for them to tell you about their friend’s boat that has ‘Jew Hunter’ painted onto it.”

    How do you know this isn’t how she found out they were Muslim?
    By having a conversation.

    And she said “boat” not “luxury yacht”.
    Maybe her neighbour’s friend drove up one day with their boat, because they were all going to go fishing or something.
    You *don’t know*.

    “Fiona, sexual attraction is decreased when a woman wears a burqa, and that’s why Muslim women call it modesty.”

    I might be modest, but it’s not humble.
    In a country where nobody wears them, it does *attract* attention and is a public display of a holier-than-thou attitude, easily interpreted as arrogance.

    • “And how many have been done by people wearing motorcycle helmets?
      Or Halloween masks?
      The fact is, you cannot enter a bank with your face covered, *except* if you’re a Muslim in a burqa.”

      True – BUT if a Muslim walks into a bank, they haven’t committed a crime and thus do not need to be identified. And whenever identification is needed, banks have basic procedures in place.

      ““How many bombs have been discovered or have been blown up in Australia?”

      So we have to wait until someone *does* blow up a few dozen people before we even consider the *potential* problem.”

      That’s SO stupid. The issue here is the banning of the burqa. Bogans often assume that burqas are worn in order to hide bombs, weapons and to be able to commit crimes. COMPLETELY UNTRUE. Why ban something when there is no precedent to do so?

      ““The number of burqa-related crimes can be counted on one hand.”

      So those victims don’t count.
      Jack the Ripper only killed *a few* prostitutes. Come on, give the guy a break!”

      We’re talking about precedent for a nation-wide ban on an article of clothing. Jack the Ripper was a white guy. So by your logic, because he only killed a few prostitutes, we should lock up all white men because that’s enough precedent for blanket legislation preventing future killings.

      “They didn’t help them commit the crime.
      The point is they help not being *identified* afterwards.”

      Complete fuckwit you are. A balaclava or a bee-keeping suit or a clown mask will ALL prevent CCTV identification afterwards.

      “In a country where nobody wears them, it does *attract* attention and is a public display of a holier-than-thou attitude, easily interpreted as arrogance.”

      Your opinion. Maybe the burqa does attract attention more these days because of frightened dickheads like you, but it doesn’t draw attention to the individual – just the outfit. And that does NOT demonstrate arrogance or a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude.

      • “They didn’t help them commit the crime.
        The point is they help not being *identified* afterwards.”

        Complete fuckwit you are. A balaclava or a bee-keeping suit or a clown mask will ALL prevent CCTV identification afterwards.

        Except if a bank robber walked into a bank wearing a balaclava or a bee-keeping suit people are gunna be pretty suspicious immediately and more likely to have an opportunity to do something about it then the bank robber that walks in wearing a burqa pretending to be a female muslim

        • Well Kyron I see you have taken your own advice

          Let us know the next time you are going to do a bank robbery.

          😀

          And don’t insult management here. Is that why you keep losing jobs?

  3. theantibogan said on ‘”True – BUT if a Muslim walks into a bank, they haven’t committed a crime and thus do not need to be identified.”

    And if you just walk into a bank in a motorcycle helmet, you have not committed a robbery.
    But its its illegal to walk into a bank in a motorcycle helmet, because someone *made a law that says so.
    They could just as easily make a law banning burqas in banks. On the *same principle: it prevents identification.

    “The issue here is the banning of the burqa. Bogans often assume that burqas are worn in order to hide bombs, weapons and to be able to commit crimes. COMPLETELY UNTRUE. Why ban something when there is no precedent to do so?”

    No precedent?
    You just said a minute ago, there had been crimes committed by people wearing them.
    The ‘issue’ is the *potential of criminals,Muslim or not, using them to prevent identification or the hiding of weapons/explosives/smuggled materials, thus preventing *detection of criminal intent.

    “A balaclava or a bee-keeping suit or a clown mask will ALL prevent CCTV identification afterwards.”

    And that’s why you can’t walk into a bank wearing them.
    Or any other high-security building.
    You would be told to leave.
    But you can’t say that to wittle old Wuslims, that would be “discwimination”.

  4. http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/three-guilty-two-walk-free-over-terror-attack-plan-20101223-196ku.html

    “three worshippers from inner-city mosques convicted of conspiring to plan a terrorist attack.”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/five-arrested-over-terror-plot-targeting-danish-newspaper/story-fn3dxity-1225978398993

    “terror plot targeting the Danish daily newspaper which published controversial photos of the prophet Muhammad”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/iraq-war-upset-sweden-bomber-taimour-abdul-wahab/story-e6frg6so-1225970600468

    “A car belonging to Wahab containing gas cylinders exploded in a busy shopping area. Less than 15 minutes later, he appears to have detonated a backpack strapped to his body in a nearby street.”

    Doncha jus luv doze wuslims?

  5. Josh says: “All from Australia and involving those who think like you do Shonk.”

    At least one of which involved the children of immigrants.

    “those who think like you do”?

    Here we go again.
    I wouldn’t dream of painting swastikas on anyone’s property
    (mainly because I’m not a Nazi, but also because I wouldn’t graffiti *anything* on someone’s property, or blow it up).

  6. Hey numbnuts – yeah you Shocky,

    My personal opinions about Islam let alone religion as a whole, aside – let me say just one simple little thing here you scared, scared, tiny little man – there is more of a credible threat to the wellbeing and sanctity of my friends and family by the humble European bee.

    Now we could all live in a great amount of fear about IMMINENT DEATH and DESTRUCTION at the hands of bees – or we could just shut the fuck up and get on with life.

    OH MY GOD – THE GAYS ARE GETTING VIOLENT TOO!!!

    http://www.nowpublic.com/world/pro-gay-marriage-supporters-attack-children-and-elderly-lansing-mich

    Shall we ban them too Shocky?

    I mean, where will it end – gays could come here and attack us too!!!

  7. Josh: “Three crime stories, one from Victoria, one from Denmark and one from Sweden.
    On the other hand we also have this, this and this”

    One from Victoria and 2 from Perth (both Perth crimes happened in 2004! ) none of which involved physical violence.
    All 3 of my articles were from December 2010 (current events!), all involving violence or intended violence.
    Why not quote some crime stats from 1873, Josh?
    And it would be almost impossible *not* to have crimes by a few white people in a country largely composed of them.
    Muslims, however, constitute a minuscule percentage of the population in Western countries, yet we hear about bombings and plots to kill far more frequently than their *proportion* of the population would warrant.

    Terror AUSTRALIS, the humble European bee doesn’t plot to blow up subways.
    And we *need* bees to pollinate plants.
    We *need* Muslims for nothing whatsoever.

    “OH MY GOD – THE GAYS ARE GETTING VIOLENT TOO!!!”

    Involving those who think like you do, Josh?

    “Shall we ban them too Shocky?”

    Linking to ‘progressive’ activists stupid behaviour hardly helps your cause, eh?
    Maybe we should ban members of certain *groups* known to do this kind of thing.

    It’s a matter of proportion, as you yourself point out.
    How often do you hear of gay criminals, compared to Muslim criminals, as a proportion of the Western population?
    When was the last gay suicide bombing on a public transport system?

    I’m sure you could find examples of any “type” of person committing crimes.
    The point is “How *common* is this tendency?”
    The answer with Muslims is: “Far too common considering their proportion of the Western population”.

  8. How many Muslims in the world? Over 1.5 billion.

    How many in Australia? Approximately 300,000

    How many crimes committed by Muslims in proportion to their numbers in Australia? Very very few.

    The greatest causal factor of crime worldwide is poverty. Not culture, not religion.

    And the hate crimes I cited are but the tip of an iceberg. There’ll be more posted here just when you are at your most smug and complacent about the racists you like to hang with.

  9. Shocky – let’s go seriously off topic again shall we, as you are so bloody remarkably good at that – but oh well, here we go…

    “Terror AUSTRALIS, the humble European bee doesn’t plot to blow up subways.
    And we *need* bees to pollinate plants.”

    Okay Asterisk Man – apparently no plants could pollinate here for the millions of years before European bees got here – the place was devoid of plant-life was it? – then Europeans brought PLANTS and bees and all was well…

    “We *need* Muslims for nothing whatsoever.” [because you said so]

    On this thesis we *need* gays for nothing whatsoever either – no point in having them in our society because I said so.

    “Linking to ‘progressive’ activists stupid behaviour hardly helps your cause, eh?”

    Yes – it does actually.

    “It’s a matter of proportion, as you yourself point out.
    How often do you hear of gay criminals, compared to Muslim criminals, as a proportion of the Western population?”

    Ummmm – how often do *you* hear of Muslim crimes compared to bikies – whole lot less bikies in Australia than Muslims – wanna ban motorbikes Shocky?

    “When was the last gay suicide bombing on a public transport system?”

    And when was the last suicide bombing of a public transport system here in Australia Shocky?

    Oh, and how many more people have been killed in the last 10 years globally as “collatoral damage” or due to “friendly fire” than in suicide attacks? – last time I checked there was a HELL of a lot less military in the world than Muslims but the civilian death toll as a result of military action is disproportionally higher – wanna ban the military too Shocky? Or just tell them to get out of Australia?

    “I’m sure you could find examples of any “type” of person committing crimes.
    The point is “How *common* is this tendency?”
    The answer with Muslims is: “Far too common considering their proportion of the Western population”.”

    Bullshit and you know it – you are closed-minded individual who lacks the mental function to actually recognise the multi-ethnic, multi-denominational mass of individuals who constitute the 1.5 billion adherents of a religion. Ergo your small pathetic mind cannot comprehend that such a mass of people may have wild variations in its adherents and therefore you feel the need to classify them all into ONE SINGLE category which you then fear with your insanely juvenile smallmindedness.

    Grow up sunshine – there are 1.5 billion of them – a ridiculously small portion of whom – driven by a multitude of factors beyond your comprehension choose a path of destructiveness – usually directed to their own societies.

    This happens with Christians too – remember the Oklahoma City bombing? Wacco, Texas – David Koresh? The Jonestown Massacre? The Holocaust? Ooooo – let’s ban Christians too shall we Shocky? Or at least stop any more of them coming to Australia…

    You have been duped into a state of paranoid psychosis by an entirely too successful fear campaign by a group of clever neo-conservative politicians who have used your stupidity to not only retain power but increase it, whilst they fucked up the global economy right in front of you… but NOOOOO you were too scared of the scary, scary invaders on rickety little boats (OOOOOO – Children overboard!!!) and a couple of bombs in hotels and railways (that were outside of Northern Ireland, Basque country or Greece for a change) – so you missed how completely they were fucking the finances around you…

    Well done shithead – you keep being scared of insignificant things while the rest of us try to patch up the mess that your beloved fear-mongering leaders got us into.

    Oh and one last thing Shocky, if you haven’t already realised your a victim of a very blatant fear campaign, then Google “Macarthyism” – that was a time when idiots like you were scared of Reds under the bed instead – same fear – different target… oh except at least the Communists actually had enough weapons to destroy a good portion of the planet and not a just a lowly fucking pipe bomb in a backpack….

    Get a life and stop being a fucking whinger – focus on something really important and life-threatening like how to combat global warming (wait – I can hear you already: “what global warming Terror AUSTRALIS? Where’s the proof? What most destructive bushfires in Australian history (Black Saturday)? What worst flooding in Queensland history? What melting polar icecaps? what correlation? what problem? Just a random series of unconnected events…”)

  10. Josh “How many Muslims in the world? Over 1.5 billion.”

    Muslims in “the world” isn’t the issue.

    Less than 2% of Muslims live in Western countries.
    And they are usually a very small proportion of each Western countries’ population.
    Probably about the same level as gays.
    Many gays are angry, alienated people, viewed with hostility by many.

    But you don’t keep hearing about gays bombing subways, killing filmmakers or plotting to commit similar atrocities on a regular basis.
    We *do* see reports of Muslims doing these things, regularly.

    And the reason is their religion encourages such attitudes.
    There’s nothing about being gay that does.
    There’s no Gay Koran inciting drag queens to stick their stilettos into the eyes of the UnGay in retribution for the sin of Non-Campiness.

    “And the hate crimes I cited are but the tip of an iceberg. There’ll be more posted here just when you are at your most smug and complacent’

    i.e. You have nothing else.

    Terror AUSTRALIS!!! “Shocky – let’s go seriously off topic again”

    You’re the one who brought up bees.

    “apparently no plants could pollinate here for the millions of years before European bees got here”

    Bees are quite specific about *which* plants they will pollinate.
    The introduction of European plants therefore required the corresponding bees.

    “We *need* Muslims for nothing whatsoever.” [because you said so]”

    Okay, so what do we *need* them for, then?

    “On this thesis we *need* gays for nothing whatsoever either – no point in having them in our society because I said so.”

    No point in them *immigrating*.

    Gays are born here.
    Bikers are born here.
    White supremacists are born here.

    As I’ve said a million times, people born here have the right to be here.
    Even if you consider them ‘useless’.
    We don’t have any choice about that.
    We *do* have a choice about which people come *into* the country from *outside*.

    “Linking to ‘progressive’ activists stupid behaviour hardly helps your cause, eh?”

    “Yes – it does actually.”

    Please explain. How?

    “collatoral damage” “friendly fire”.
    Yes, military operations tend to have the dangerous side effect of causing death.
    I’m sure the soldiers are aware of this when they sign up.

    “wanna ban the military too Shocky?”

    You’re not clever.
    This isn’t an argument.
    The armed forces are not an alien introduction from another civilisation.
    They are a normal function of any society.
    We *need* them. And they were born here.

    “actually recognise the multi-ethnic, multi-denominational mass of individuals who constitute the 1.5 billion adherents of a religion.”

    It’s the multi that worries me.

    Almost none of those ethnicities have any relationship to us, and they few that do are very distant relationships, with virtually no local representation until recently.

    I couldn’t care less how many types of Muslims there are “out there”.
    My concern is with life “in here”, Australia.

    And Islam, in *any* form, has never been a significant part of it.

    “you feel the need to classify them all into ONE SINGLE category”

    “Muslims” are a category.
    They are all believers in Allah, followers of Mohammad, and readers of the Koran.
    That’s why they have a name. Names only exist to classify.

    What makes them different, makes them a “subcategory”, not “a different category altogether”.

    “a ridiculously small portion of whom choose a path of destructiveness – usually directed to their own societies.”

    It’s not Muslim-on-Muslim violence that concerns me.

    “Google “Macarthyism” [or perhaps McCarthyism] – that was a time when idiots like you were scared of Reds under the bed instead”

    And today’s Reds are “racists”.

    They’re everywhere! Fire them from their jobs!
    Ban their books! Prosecute them for Facebook jokes!
    Teach children in school to be forever vigilant lest their evil propaganda warp our minds!
    ARRRRRRGGHH!!

    “same fear – different target”

    Indeed.

    Global warming?
    Now who’s off-topic?

    “Just a random series of unconnected events”

    i.e. Weather.

    Weather *is* a chaotic system.
    It has never been, and cannot be stable.

    • “Gays are born here.
      Bikers are born here.
      White supremacists are born here.

      As I’ve said a million times, people born here have the right to be here.
      Even if you consider them ‘useless’.
      We don’t have any choice about that.
      We *do* have a choice about which people come *into* the country from *outside*.”

      Muslims belong to a religion. More often than not, they are born here. And what of the white, Anglo Saxon Muslims?

      Just thought I’d throw that in there. Really too busy to address your posts of late, as my job is quite demanding. Sorry Shonky.

    • Shockadelic: And today’s Reds are “racists”. They’re everywhere! Fire them from their jobs!
      Feeling a little oppressed and persecuted again are you, racist bogan trash? Oh, look, the poor widdle waysist feels victimised. When you do, you tend to exaggerate that victimhood. Racists are not everywhere. They’re a powerless minority who haven’t evolved like the rest of us. They’re social pariahs. As it should be. If this minority of people are so mindbogglingly stupid that they publicly append their names to comments the majority of society deems racist they deserve to lose their jobs. Long live the oppression and persecution of racists 😀

  11. theantibogan: “Really too busy to address your posts of late, as my job is quite demanding”.

    Thanks for stopping by.

    I know how time consuming it must be, travelling from Melbourne to Bankstown every week.

    “Muslims belong to a religion. More often than not, they are born here.”

    Really?
    Care to quote some stats?

    The 2006 Census data accesible online provides a list of children’s religions by country of parents’ origin (no data directly available on parents, but presumably similar).

    Of the 101,894 children aged 0-14:

    70,742 (69.4%) both parents born overseas
    17,923 (17.5%) either father or mother born overseas
    5,668 (just 5.6%) both parents born in Australia
    7,561 (7.4%) not stated

    As you can see, if at least 86% of Muslim children had overseas-born parents, then the majority of the parents couldn’t be Australian-born either.

    “And what of the white, Anglo Saxon Muslims?”

    Jus soli

    You can change your religion.
    You can’t change your genes.

  12. Shockadelic: “I know how time consuming it must be, travelling from Melbourne to Bankstown every week.”

    STILL confused about that Shocky? You need to get over it. Remember when you claimed (erroneously) that this site was trying to change people’s opinions (it’s to expose racist bogans)? You didn’t read the “about” section of the site did you?

    The authors of the posts on this website are white, Anglo Saxon, atheist males and females, for the record.

    Authors = more than one. There’s more than one person posting as “tab”. One of those authors might be in Sydney. Another might be in Melbourne. Of course, if you actually read the site description you’d know that.

  13. http://news.ninemsn.com.au/national/8192344/kfc-employee-screams-insults-at-customer

    Would you like jihad with that?

    Why Why: “Authors = more than one. There’s more than one person posting as “tab”.”

    And he/she/they/it never clarify which of them is making a statement, but always use first-person-singular terms (I/my/me/mine/myself).

    They also all speak the same way, with the same tone, so how can I tell them apart?
    Like you and Terror Australis.

    If 3 different people are going to regularly post messages on the same forum, wouldn’t it be more sensible to use 3 different IDs?

    Until then, I’ll consider them all the same person.
    They’re a borg-mind anyway.

  14. Shockadelic: And he/she/they/it never clarify which of them is making a statement, but always use first-person-singular terms (I/my/me/mine/myself).
    Their blog. Their rules.

    Shockadelic: They also all speak the same way, with the same tone, so how can I tell them apart? Like you and Terror Australis.
    Yes it’s very understandable, given your history of extreme difficulties in this regard (eg Keith and Kenny).

    • Hi Why Why – it’s me again – which according to Shocky means that it’s you again and therefore I’m addressing myself here…or you’re addressing yourself here… oh wow it’s all so very confusing…

      … Maybe we are akin to Hindu deities and are merely avatars of the same god who are different but the same…

      …or perhaps it’s more a Christian thing where you can be The Father, I’ll be The Son… which would therefore make Shockaholic definitely The Holy Goat.

      Oh dear it’s all just a little too taxing and difficult to follow for a man like Shocky – after all this is a chap that loooooves to deal in sweeping generalisations so perhaps he can only see us all as the same person – bit like Muslims are all the same too…

      • Terror Australis: …or perhaps it’s more a Christian thing where you can be The Father, I’ll be The Son… which would therefore make Shockaholic definitely The Holy Goat.

        ROFLMAO!

  15. yeah guys im acutally for banning the bura but thats ebcuase it acutally has no religion or quranic background. NONE.
    its a cultural thing.
    you need to disntiugish between culture and traditions
    a muslim indian/pakistani weddings looks nothing like a muslim persian wedding.
    a spanish christian wedding isnt even close to a russian christian weding
    in suaid arabia, women voted that they DIDNT wan the vote.
    only country in the islamic world where women have such views. paksitan and egypt all have prminent female politicians and leaders
    in afhganistan, after being under the taliban who are probably stricter than saudi groups; women are now joining the armed forces and its considered a good thing by most afghans.
    culture not religion.
    and jsut so u know the islamic shcolar pointed out in court cases, islam is CLEAR- women are not allowe da burka in court.
    as for in general i beleive in banning it becuase as ive already said its cultural and not religous at all – the hijab is another story. theres no compulsion to wear it, but alot of women do and i don beeive in bainnign that its like banning a woman’s habit in a nunnery.
    but yeha as far as the burqa is concerned ban it; but probably not for the reasons bogans want it banned;
    for me personally, i belive that burqa has a patronising, condescening effect that basically teaches women that they ‘need protection’ i think if thats what people who have thier duaghers wear burqa want then teach the women slef defense.
    women shudnt need to be protected at the expense of liberty
    or any gorup

  16. by the way shocky jihad is the christian equivalent of overcoming temptation of the devil
    jihad, actually means internal war. its an itnernal war that muslims are supposed to wage in order to overcome greed, lust, pride etc.. just like christians must not fall to the tempations of the devil.

  17. and the reason ppl like shocky piss me off is your motivations behind wanting to ban the burqa are completely different, wrong uneducated, bigoted and everything else
    for me i know for a fact its cultural, not religion and on top of that enough psychology studies have shown the vicious cycle of patronising.
    you patronise a group of people; guess what tey become handicapped they CANT do things for themselves – people have done it to women, races of color ( read gone with the wind theres hundreds of lines referring to how whites should treat blacks gently because they dont no any better and its for their protection)… its not religious, it relates to the sluts deserve to be raped slippery slope and its patronising. women shouldn’t need protection form rapist men. men (and hey crazy butch rapist women) shouldn’t be raping in the first place.

  18. eir: “yeah guys im acutally for banning the bura but thats ebcuase it acutally has no religion or quranic background. NONE.”

    Banning it is banning it.

    Your motivations are irrelevant to the legal statue enacted.
    If burqus are banned, they’re banned.
    Whatever the reasons were for banning it make no practical difference.

    So why is it okay for you to ban burqas, but if I do it’s “completely different, wrong uneducated, bigoted and everything else”?
    A ban is a ban is a ban.

    “women voted that they DIDNT want the vote.”

    Was there a disruption in the space-time continuum?

    “as for in general i believe in banning it because as ive already said its cultural and not religous at all”
    “i belive that burqa has a patronising, condescening effect that basically teaches women that they ‘need protection’”

    And Mullaji thinks bikinis have an effect that teaches women they’re a piece of meat, who have no other value than as a sex object for men.

    Can Mullaji ban bikinis for “cultural” reasons when you ban burqas?
    Two bans for the price of one: The Women’s Clothing Restriction Bill 2011.

    eir: “by the way shocky jihad is the christian equivalent of overcoming temptation of the devil
    jihad, actually means internal war.”

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

    “Muslims use the word in a religious context to refer to *three* types of struggles:
    an internal struggle to maintain faith,
    the struggle to improve the Muslim society,
    or the struggle in a *holy war*”

    A holy war against whom?
    Themselves?
    Other Muslims?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad#Warfare_.28Jihad_bil_Saif.29

    “Within classical Islamic jurisprudence, jihad is the only form of *warfare* permissible under Islamic law, and may consist in wars against *unbelievers*, apostates, rebels, highway robbers and dissenters renouncing the authority of Islam.”

    Would you like Fail with that?

    • Oh, surprise, surprise, Shockadelic is quoting Wikipedia selectively. Haven’t you got it into your thick skull yet Shocky – this makes you look dishonest AND stupid? Hmmm, I wonder why you didn’t quote the following from your beloved Wikipedia.

      The term ‘jihad’ has accrued both violent and non-violent meanings. It can simply mean striving to live a moral and virtuous life, spreading and defending Islam as well as fighting injustice and oppression, among other things.

      Wonder why Shocky didn’t quote this either:

      In his work, The History of Baghdad, Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, an 11th-century Islamic scholar, referenced a statement by the companion of Muhammad Jabir ibn Abd-Allah. The reference stated that Jabir said, “The Prophet… returned from one of his battles, and thereupon told us, ‘You have arrived with an excellent arrival, you have come from the Lesser Jihad to the Greater Jihad—the striving of a servant (of Allah) against his desires.”[16] This reference gave rise to the distinguishing of two forms of jihad: “greater” and “lesser”. Some Islamic scholars dispute the authenticity of this reference and consider the meaning of jihad as a holy war to be more important.[5]

      Hmmm, wonder why Shocky didn’t quote this either:

      In later centuries, especially in the course of the colonization of large parts of the Muslim world, emphasis has been put on non-militant aspects of the jihad. Today, Muslim authors only recognize wars with the aim of territorial defense as well as the defense of religious freedom as legitimate.[24]

      No matter how hard you try and twist Wikipedia and quote it dishonestly and selectively, there is more than one meaning of the word “jihad” and most Muslims seem to think it’s the internal struggle – and even when it refers to warfare the focus is on self-defence.

      So quit the pathological lying act, Shocky, it’s not doing your demented cause any favours.

  19. Oh and Shocky’s chronic selective quoting of Wikipedia has to be taken in context with this comment he hurled at theantibogan on another post…

    “Who can’t just argue like a sane, normal person, but must constantly lie, distort, abuse.”

    Clearly Shocky you don’t think you’ve convinced us of how much of a hypocrite you are. I’d ask you if you want any fail with that, but you seem more than capable of showing what an epic failure you are on your own.

  20. Yawn. That’s OLD news, as well as another pathetic attempt to change the topic from your dishonest quoting from Wikipedia.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/07/egyptian-muslims-serve-as_n_805951.html
    Sorry but trying to change the topic doesn’t change the fact that you have been shown to be a pathological liar who distorts and twists the facts to try and make a point. As well as a hypocrite who – in his own words, “can’t just argue like a sane, normal person, but must constantly lie, distort, abuse.”
    Nice try, bogan, but fail, fail, fail, fail, fail.

  21. A workmate, dumfounded, told me how he spotted a boat named “Jew Hunter” out near Rush Cutters bay; so there may be some validity to the above story. Instantly remembered this blog post when he mentioned it.

    Goes to show that racist assholes are of all backgrounds – though I’m sure if you were to press them on the issue they’d claim they were hunting Jewfish. Not cool if you ask me.

  22. Just to clarify for the writer of this article: Carnita Matthews has a history of interaction with the police, and this wasn’t a brain fart, it was deliberately calculated to be a threat to the officer to make him change his stance. Carnita Matthews is not a very pleasant person full stop, and the behaviour of her supporters as they left court was not “culturally appropriate” as her lawyer suggested, chanting Allah Ackbar and jostling/striking media is not cultural for any segment of society.

    What do you think Carnita’s punishment for this heat-of-the-moment brain explosion? SIX MONTHS IMPRISONMENT. Held over or dismissed, because the judge couldn’t identify the person handing in the statement to police, the very problem in the first place at the roadside stop. I would suggest that police and others remember that Muslim women are allowed and indeed compelled to show their faces for identity purposes, attested to by the Islamic authorities in Australia and overseas. The hue and cry to ban it needs to be moderated with a call for common sense, the police can and should be able to identify anyone they are interacting with, as they do with motor bike riders or others wearing head dress or scarves etc…rabid calling of Burqa wearing folk as bombers and killers is not helpful at all. Wise up and apply an even common sense approach and everyone will be fine!

    “I’ve got my P-plates on my car … there was nothing wrong with how they were displayed,” Mrs Matthews says on the video.
    “You look at me and see me wearing this and you couldn’t handle it. All cops are racist.”
    She then threatens, “100 per cent”, that she will take the matter to court and fight the charge.

    Court documents have revealed that she had been fined seven times for traffic infringements before she was stopped by police in June last year for not displaying her P-plates in the incident that sparked the row that spilled over to the District Court in NSW yesterday.
    Since she first received her learner licence in 1998 at the age of 33, she has twice had her provisional licence suspended for totting up too many demerit points and twice had her licence suspended for non payment of fines.
    The State Debt Recovery Office had to recover the fines. Both of those two suspensions for non payment of fines were later lifted.
    It is not known how many times she was physically stopped by police and whether she had her face covered by a burqa or a niqab on those occasions.
    A number of times she was caught on camera speeding and disobeying traffic lights.

    ms Matthews knew what she was doing and why, that is more of a problem than the burqa itself, like I said she is not a nice person and was manipulative and evasive when being dealt with, along with very confrontational and demanding, the sort of negative stereotype the anti muslim brigade love to hate!

    For me personally I am not threatened or fearful of covered women so it is a non event for me, but the common sense solution needs to be in place to stop all the useless fighting over a topic that is low on any law enforcement agencies list of priorities.

    • Well Dave we can’t pick the vic..

      Notwithstanding Carnita Matthews’ behaviour she is just one of many serial traffic offenders who take up the time of police, courts and defence lawyers.

      What made her case different was from the start she was made the target of a vicious hate campaign on social media. She and her family were forced to move house because the sort of creatures we deal with regularly here were targeting her and making death threats. We have screenshots of these threats which we sent to her solicitor.

      And what was the reason? Was her offence particularly heinous? No – hundreds of thousands of people are fined for similar offences, often arbitrarily. There’s no doubt that minor traffic offences (we are not talking dangerous or culpable driving or high-range PCA here, where lives are actually threatened) are a cosy cash cow for governments and local Councils. In fact so entrenched is this reverse Robin Hood system that most people do not bother to fight the charges, but pay up.

      We are not talking murder or sexual offences here.

      The sole reason for the campaign against Carnita Matthews was that she is a Muslim.

      And ironically, her attackers’ records on similar and worse offences would likely not bear inspection.

      • I agree, no doubt, just thinking along the lines of the sorts of rubbish you will get sprouted over that case or comments. I particularly agree with the cash raising part of your comment, and yeah, if people took the time to defend the charges and had the resources they would be surprised to learn most will get short shrift in court but it is almost impossible for most folks to get that sort of thing sorted being easier to pay up as you say.
        As for the moving house, I was unaware of that and that is something no one should condone, and I don’t! The scum who load that shit onto a page need hounding from pillar to post, do you have them up on here? That is disturbing to say the least and needs to be seen by as many normal people as possible! Keep up the good work guys and girls.

What do YOU think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s