Posted on 08/04/2017 7:00:00 PM PDT by MtnClimber
Last night’s news feed featured Bondi, a suburb of Sydney, Australia. A planning request by the Jewish community in Bondi for the construction of a new synagogue was turned down by the local council, on the grounds that it a synagogue would bring with it an increased risk of terrorism.
This constitutes, of course, the voluntary implementation of sharia law by the secular authorities in a non-Muslim country. And it’s standard practice for the Great Jihad: make the infidel afraid, and then wait for him to apply Islamic rules on his own initiative in order reduce his fear (and the fear of the people who vote him into office).
(Excerpt) Read more at gatesofvienna.net ...
You didn’t know that?
No wonder the Australian government wanted to disarm the citizens.
I drive a concrete mixer truck, if i had to deliver concrete to a Muslim job i would toss some bacon in the load.
:)
I’ll fight Sharia Law.. Sharia is unconstitutional here and if it ever happened.. Civil War will be happening...
Terrorists employ terror attacks to force the people to accept Sharia law.
We are advised by our leaders people should accept Sharia Law to avoid terrorism
Does that mean our leaders are terrorists?
Of course the premise of Sharia Law eliminating terrorism ignores the fact that the Moslems are killing lots of their and have been since the very beginning.
I would say that 0bama and hillary “colluded” with and supported terrorists and therefore they ARE terrorists too.
Didn’t work in Afghanistan.
I have been to Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and United Arab Emirates just after the first Gulf War. I know as much as I need to know about muslim countries and their culture.
How about we round up all Muslims who want to live under Sharia and ship them out to various Islamic paradises instead?
I am OK with that. I would propose we drop them off from 25,000 ft. That would prevent future terrorism which is a societal good.
In Australia they can do what they want. Here, conform to our laws and you’ll be safe too. (Without the threat of the safe people)
rwood
This is not actually true. The development application submitted included a synagogue, a community centre and a large block of flats to cover the costs. The flats exceeded the building code and would have required a rezoning of the area. This is what the council rejected, with the support of local residents who did not want the site overdeveloped.
As a result, the development itself was never actually voted on by the council and the applicant went straight to the Land and Environment Court with a submission including a security assessment. The Land and Environment Court rejected the application on various grounds, such as overdevelopment, as well as stating that the security assessment was not satisfactory.
This last is the aspect which has now been hyped around the world and it is totally misleading.
Corner of Worth and Center Streets on a Tuesday morning almost 16 years ago did it for me.
Has there ever been - in a Western country - one documented case where planning permission for new mosque was denied on the grounds that Jews might go mental about it? No, thought not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.