According to recent reports from Australia, the national anthem of that country for a majority of Muslims is “oppressive,” or at least that is the claim that the Islamist activist group Hizb ut-Tahrir claimed at the “Innocent Until Proven Muslim” conference at Bankstown,
The conference was attended by about 800 people. A key issue raised at the conference by the group was Muslim children being required to sing the Australian national anthem at school.
“The Australian anthem is based upon a particular view in history, it is a reading of history, and it is a statement which conforms to particular values. Now, if one does not share those values, why would they express it?” Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman, Hamzah Quereshi, told The Daily Telegraph. [6] [13] Uthman Badar, the main spokesman for the group, claims that the Australian government “claims to afford freedom, but seeks to impose values and beliefs” on Muslims.
He continued; “It’s not enough that you obey the law, no, you have to adopt our values.” “If you don’t share those values, why should they be forced to sing it?” Mr. Badar told the conference. [1] There is a pretty good reason for that, like Robert Spencer has noted: “Because if you don’t adopt our values, eventually you will subvert the law.
A nation of people without shared values will eventually collapse into dissolution and probably civil war.” [3] This also begs the question: if you don’t share the values of the country you are living in, why don’t you choose to live somewhere else? [14] This comment from the muslim community follow a backlash from many politicians and commentators to news last week that the principal of a Victorian primary school had excused Muslim students from singing Advance Australia Fair.
Mr Badar said the campaign by government and agencies against radicalisation was actually a smokescreen to “make Muslims less Islamic”. “It is nothing less than forced assimilation … sought to be justified by exaggerated fear of a security threat,” he said. Government efforts to promote what it bills as a moderate form of Islam might on occasion “buy out some Imam”, Mr Badar said, but overall, “the attempt to reform Islam is doomed to failure.” [3] The conference heard a series of members of the Muslim community, some by prerecorded audiovisual clips and some live from the floor — deliver testimonials of what they claimed was oppressive behaviour by officials against them as Muslims, at airports, in police raids, and in high security prisons.
The conference is just one example of the refusal of Muslims to assimilate to the countries that they choose to be a part of. Is it oppressive to ask that the community show pride and respect for their home? Apparently so. The irony of course is that while Muslims complain of assimilation, the teachings within the Koran preface to many just the opposite, and history has demonstrated throughout the ages, that devote practicing Muslims, in many cases when in the majority prefer subjugation rather than assimilation.
These are the exact same Muslim migrants that are coming to the U.S. in droves. There is no reason to assume that the results will be different here than they are with this case in Australia. Polls have shown repeatedly that Muslims do not hold a nations laws over Sharia law. [1] There’s of course an easy and obvious remedy in solving this issue of what Muslim’s consider “an oppressive campaign” of “forced assimilation”…that obvious remedy, “don’t migrate to those countries that expect you to assimilate”, it’s really that easy. [1]
