Islamic Leaders In Australia Denounce Democracy and Call on Muslims to Accept Only Sharia Law

Leaders of the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir met in Australia this week to call on Muslims to reject Democracy and moderate Islam as “haram” or forbidden under the Koran (Qur’an). British Hizb ut-Tahrir leader Burhan Hanif told an audience that Democracy is a lie and that no laws but those in the Koran could govern mankind.

Hanif insisted “We should not be conned or succumb to the disingenuous and flawed narrative that the only way to engage politically is through the secular democratic process. It is prohibited and haram.” He specifically warned that Muslims could not embrace any system based on “secular and erroneous concepts such as democracy and freedom.”

His views were echoed by Australian Islamic leader Wassim Dourehi, who told the conference that Muslims should not support “any kafir (non-believer) political party” in “this godforsaken country” of Australia. He specifically denounced moderate Islamic views as “a perverted concoction of Western governments.”

Source: News.

47 thoughts on “Islamic Leaders In Australia Denounce Democracy and Call on Muslims to Accept Only Sharia Law”

  1. Mike A,

    Bravo. Can I request that for an encore you juggle knives while gargling the Love Theme From Spartacus?


    Mespo, Et al,

    The problem may not be who’s read the Bible, but who has read WHICH PARTS of the Bible. Now, any Jewish Messiah of the period was going to have to walk a fine line. Inherent in the word was the idea that he was going to be a political\military leader and cast out the Romans. The problem being that one really couldn’t just go around saying that was their plan and not get killed by said Romans.

    So on the one hand we have a man very concerned with encouraging the Jewish people to believe he was sent by God to re-establish their kingdom, and on the other hand trying to convince the Romans that that was the furthest thing from his mind. I’m pretty sure he’s going to send out mixed messages.

    Not to mention that any English version of the Bible is most likely a conglomeration of translations of translations of purposefully edited oral traditions. Not the most accurate source for finding out what somebody actually did and said.

  2. I wish we would quit romanticizing the gd pilgrims and make Jamestown the historical founding of our country. Jamestown was undertaken for the purpose of making money. As Calvin Coolidge said “The business of America is Business”.

    We need a committee to promote Jamestown as the true founding of our country. Non-religious and with the idea of making money. It would give those nags in the DAR and the Mayflower Society something to chew on. And who wouldn’t want to be descended from a bunch of adventurous entrepreneurs rather than a bunch of collectivist Christians.

    And look at the end result, Massachusett has given us the Kennedys and Barney Frank while Virginia has given us Jefferson, Madison, Washington and George Mason.

  3. Elaine M.,

    Thank you .. that is exactly what I was taught and it drives me slightly nuts when I hear the other, uneducated versions.

  4. Tootie said: “Going backwards in time, Puritans (the Pilgrims) wanted to be free to have their religion.”

    Not exactly correct. I taught about the Pilgrims and the settlement at Plymouth (Plimoth Plantation) to my elementary students for many years.

    by Richard Howland Maxwell
    Pilgrim Society Note, Series Two, March 2003

    Near the end of his term as president of the United States, Ronald Reagan delivered an address in which he sought to call the American people back to the values of – in his words – “that old Pilgrim, John Winthrop.” Reagan’s successor in office, George Bush – who, according to some, ought to have known better because he is a descendant of Mayflower passenger John Howland – compounded the historical error in his 1992 Thanksgiving proclamation by saying, “This Thanksgiving… let us renew the solemn commitment that John Winthrop and his fellow Pilgrims made more than 100 years ago.” Mr. Bush not only had the Pilgrims and Puritans confused; he missed their dates by more than two centuries! And a bit more recently, the November 1994 issue of the Daughters of the American Revolution Magazine suggested that we include in our Thanksgiving that year “the Puritans in Plymouth, Massachusetts from whom most of our traditions come.” The same article later described the “first Thanksgiving” as “the 1621 feast to celebrate the first long winter the Puritans survived in the New World.”

    These illustrations of the apparent ignorance of many Americans concerning at least some parts of our own history have produced among some of us Mayflower descendants an emotional reaction. We become highly incensed if someone refers to the Plymouth settlers as “Puritans,” and we become downright angry at the thought that Winthrop might be called a “Pilgrim.” The purpose of my presentation today is to examine with as little prejudice as possible the shared history, similarities, and differences between the two groups we commonly call Pilgrims and Puritans.

    The Pilgrims at Plymouth were Separatists; the Puritans at Massachusetts Bay were not. As a matter of fact, one of the deepest concerns for Governor Winthrop was the fear that, in New England, his followers would be drawn to the Separatism that was already here because of the presence of Plymouth Colony. And that, in effect, is what ultimately happened.

  5. Buddha:

    Me too but when the stakes are high you are left with a stark choice between conversation and fighting. Sadly, I don’t know how to converse with stupid.

  6. “If we have to fight one last battle for American Independence it might as well be against the legions of the stupid.”


    I’m generally opposed to war as a problem solving methodology, but there is a war I think I could actually get behind.

  7. Tootie:

    “Your attending Catholic schools only makes me more certain than before that you don’t know much about the Bible. Most Catholics I’m acquainted with don’t read much in their Bibles.”


    “They are the lawless usurpers making domestic tranquility impossible.”


    With every keystroke you prove you don’t read the Bible either there Tootie, but if it’s any solace, your knowledge of the Bible clearly dwarfs your superficial knowledge of law, history, politics, and just plain ol’ common sense.

    I also love your peeping calls for insurrection. We know what happened the last time folks like you tried that approach. Take a little walk through Antietam or Gettysburg or Cold Harbor or maybe just a stroll amid the rows at Arlington to see just how well that worked out.

    I don’t mind ignorant people, just cowardly ones making veiled threats. To quote your favorite President in a slightly different context, “Bring it on.” If we have to fight one last battle for American Independence it might as well be against the legions of the stupid.

Comments are closed.