Australian Defence League: Born April 9, 2010; Died October 9, 2010.


That was quick.

In the world-historical battle against the creeping Islamification of Australia, the ‘Australian Defence League’ has proven to be about as competent as a one-legged man in an arse-kicking competition.

Months ago, the ADL announced that on Saturday, October 9, it would be holding a rally against Islam on the steps of the Sydney Opera House.

But suppose they called a protest, and nobody came?

Well, that’s precisely what happened.

The non-event in Sydney follows the non-event in Melbourne on April 9, the first occasion upon which the keyboard commandos declared their intention to take to the streets.

A A ADL: about as useful as tits on a bull.

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2024 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in !nataS, Anti-fascism, State / Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

20 Responses to Australian Defence League: Born April 9, 2010; Died October 9, 2010.

  1. inglourious_basterd says:

    Far more interesting and important things going on yesterday.

    Bathurst, Cricket and the Games on telly…

    Breathing, living…

  2. Aiden Venedith says:

    Thats great news. So glad those evil people and their movement have been destroyed, now, hopefully the Islamic community can grow and grow in peace.

    Now that the ADL are out of the way, how about we go on a good old fashioned Fag hunt, and slaughter every single poofter we find in the most brutal and horrific way we can think of… i know, lets watch Hellraiser to get some idea’s, eh? (since the Qur’an says so)


    as for women, screw em. they only have brains the size of peas anyway lol, so lets force them to wear conservative clothing especially in the hot *spits* Australian summer, since wearing anything that shows skin means your-a-askin-for-a-rapin since it is like, now how did that wonderful shiek put it? oh yeah, like leaving meat out like dogs SOMETHING YOU SUPPORT WITH YOUR BLANKET SUPPORT OF ISLAM.

    and as for children (rubs hands together) get ready for some good old action there eh. now i dont want to make a joke about that, even i have my limits, but mohummad WAS a pedo, and the practice still being carried out is well documented. seriously mate, thats sick AND YOU SUPPORT THIS WITH YOUR BLANKET SUPPORT OF I-SLAM INTO BUILDINGS YOU PEDO LOVING CUNT WHICH MAKES YOU NO BETTER!!!!!!

    no class, no… something… cant remember what it was… any how and no boarders

    wait, i remember no class, no GODS no boarders. that’s the tag line for anarchy right?

    your a fucking hypocrite Andrew S


    why dont you do something useful, like die and donate your body to science… im fascinated to know how any living organism can survive with a body made entirely of bullshit, and air in its head

  3. @ndy says:

    G’day Aiden,

    You’re obviously v upset and/or drunk, but I have to say: writing things IN CAPITAL LETTERS doesn’t make ’em any betterer.

    Apart from that, a few things.

    1. The ADL isn’t a movement, nor is it evil. It’s a coupla disgruntled Facebook users, who express bigotry and ignorance, and are animated, among other things, by an irrational fear that Sharia law is about to be imposed on Australia.

    2. I’m an atheist. As such, I make a pretty bad Muslim.

    3. Re Islam and homosexuality.

    Yeah: you can find a basis for ‘homophobia’ in the Qur’an. By the same token, you can find it in the Bible too. In fact, it would appear to be one of the many things shared by the Abrahamic faiths. That said, in Australia, Christians and/or Muslims and/or Jews aren’t about to embark upon a pogrom against homosexuals.

    Further, as far as I’m aware, without having studied the statistics closely, in contemporary Australia, it would be more accurate to state that homophobic violence, in particular, is largely the domain of young men — few, if any of whom have been motivated by a religious calling.

    Homophobia has a secular basis too, after all.

    Beyond this, I think these attitudes and behaviours have a good deal more to do with reinforcing hegemonic notions of masculinity than they do ‘religion’ as such. Plus, the truth is that it makes some young men feel good to beat the shit outta some poor bastard they assume is gay.

    Oh, and while I’m not sure which verse of the Qur’an recommends films based on the works of Clive Barker, pls feel free to enlighten me.

    4. Re Islam and misogyny.

    See above. Also, Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly’s remarks (2006) — blaming women who “sway suggestively”, wear makeup and no hijab, for sexual attacks upon them — are fucking idiotic, and consequently were subject to widespread public condemnation and ridicule. Nevertheless, men raped women prior to his comments being made public, and they continue to do so. Making the obvious point that a woman does not bear responsibility for attacks upon her person because she wears a hijab (or not) or any other item of clothing (or not), does not end sexual assaults upon women by men; men of varying faiths, ages, classes, professions, racial and ethnic backgrounds, and so on.

    5. Re Islam and children.

    See above. Also, in the Australian context, you may not have noticed, but of the religious faiths, it’s the Catholic Church which has come under most criticism for pedophilia, and rightly so: not just because priests and other Church men have committed child sex abuse, but because the Church, in actively protecting them from prosecution, has helped to perpetuate such crimes.

    6. There’s no tag line for anarchy, but I do sometimes wear board shorts. Also, I will die, as will you, as will every single person reading these words. As to whether or not I’m gonna donate my body to science… hmmm, maybe, I dunno. Makes ya think tho’…

    And of course…

    Ni Dieu Ni Maitre.

  4. Karl says:

    You just got dominated Aiden, you pathetic retard.

  5. Wells says:

    Wow, Karl, way to show that guy who is boss. You’re no less an idiot. Congrats.

    Good on you for sharing your opinion, Aiden.

  6. Nalanda says:

    These pathetic Leftie types who compare the Bible with the Quran really don’t get it do they. They’ve got their head so far up their arse they’ve become oblivious to anything apart from their own hubris. Arrogant and self righteous they don’t see that those of us of with still a grasp on reality laugh at them for becoming just the sort of wimpy sycophants the political elite always hoped they become. They don’t understand that the Bible is not – these days and in the most part – taken that seriously, nor do they seem to comprehend that the Bible no longer holds the power to incite murder quite as much as does the Quran. To equate the two is to make a fundamental mistake, namely to think you know something when you haven’t bothered to study up on the subject. For too many to ignore, the Quran is the living and final word of Allah – make no mistake about it, they wish to bring about another caliphate and so dominate the rest of us. And whether it’s only a minority or not, those who hold such uncivilized views – through demographics, terror and Saudi financial backing – are beginning to wield more and more political power over every continent of the globe and whoever says otherwise is either lying or simply ignorant. Whilst the rest of the world moved on this little book of hate has made sure that its adherents became securely mired in the 7th century. If Islamofascism continues to spread it will be due to two things, Saudi oil and pathetic apologists like the parrots of the official line above.

  7. @ndy says:


    It’s not pathetic but entirely appropriate to compare the Bible and the Quran in this context. In both texts there are condemnations of homosexuality, misogyny, and advocacy of authoritarian control over society and the individual. This is an elementary point which Aiden either fails to understand or chooses to ignore. Abusing those who don’t share your fears of an Islamic takeover of Australian society does not render these simple facts non-existent. Besides: engaging in the comparative study of religion is not a left-wing occupation, but a pursuit open to all, regardless of political perspective.

    With regards the situation of the Bible/Christianity and the Quran/Islam in Australia:

    The majority of the population continue to identify as Christian; only a tiny percentage as Muslim. The Christian festivals of Christmas and Easter are national public holidays in Australia; Muslim festivals are accorded no such privilege. The chief religious conflicts in Australia have been between rival Christianities: Catholicism versus Protestantism.

    In terms of politics and law, references to God and Queen saturate our legal and political processes, a reflection of their rootedness in British law and custom, for over 1,000 years dominated by Christian thought. There are now and have been many self-identified Christians in Federal and State Parliaments; Australia’s first Muslim Federal MP was elected only this year.

    Culturally speaking, the Bible has been the object of study, veneration and a cultural reference point in a way that renders the Quran as obscure as your reasoning.

    Yes, for Muslims the Quran is The Word of God. But the desire to bring about a global caliphate–that is, the desire to dominate–is one shared by many non-Muslims. History is littered with examples of failed empires. Understanding how such desires are shaped in order to support existing forms of what are, in the final analysis, thoroughly secular forms of authority, power and control are what interests me most about Islam, about religion, and about politics. Beyond that, I would recommend Muslims read ‘Letter to a Young Muslim’ by Tariq Ali or possibly ‘The Misery of Islam’ (a 1980s text). Also ‘The Realization and Suppression of Religion’ by Ken Knabb (1977). As for The corrupt, feudal world of the House of Saud, they were a creation of the British Empire, and are widely despised.

  8. Pingback: Free Love in Amsterdam : EDL ~versus~ Geert Wilders | slackbastard

  9. lest we forget says:

    can i play?…good.
    1. the adl? meh
    2. i’m agnostic. however remote, there remains a wee chance. though it would be of a form that no one could comprehend.
    3. the bible is a result of thousands and thousands of years of oral history. in this context can it’s rejection of homosexuality be understood. in nomadic or hunter gatherer societies, homosexuality was not an option. it probably existed, but was of necessity, ruthlessly excised for the very real reasons of tribal harmony and continuity. as the various traditions and ethics of the tribe were solidified and finally set in writing, these codes were so entrenched as to be irrefutable. with the coming of sedentary civilizations, many of the codes that formally bound the tribe together, were now viewed by many to be superfluous. the keepers of these traditions have always fought against these tendencies in the belief that what has held true for their people since the beginning of time was no less relevant then than now. this is probably the reason for the incredible capacity of the jews to maintain a cohesive social order despite being the most brutalised people in history. mohammad in his formative years, noted this, and contemplating on the then foundationless morass of arab society, developed an admiration and finally an imitation of the jewish social fabric. as homosexuality in sedentary arabia was quite unrestrained due to a lack of a rigid system of law and tradition, mohammad naturally included it’s prohibition. it’s one of the ironies of history that because of islam’s indoctrinated debasement and debarment of women, homosexuality is a psychologically rational consequence, therefore is more widespread in the muslim world, excluding indonesia, than the ‘decadent’ west.
    4. yes, rapes still and will always occur. the difference being, islam codifies the subjugation of women. so while many miscreants harbour a tendency to rape, a muslim can always point to some obscure reference in the quran to justify his actions.
    5. it must be a cruel god to demand of his shepherds to obstain from the single most powerful urge in human existence. the catholic inclination for this most torturous of principles is incomprehensible, and it is little wonder why some develop strange tendencies. this however, pales beside the countless millions of children, who in some way have benefited from the generosity and spirit of christianity. not in the name of christianity, but christianity itself. there is a difference. christianity, as basic concept, is an attempt to bring the god of the jews to people everywhere through love of god (previously, only a jewish concept). islam, on the hand, is an attempt to bring the god of the jews to people everywhere by the point of the sword. a child brought up under the guidance of the new testiment is vastly different to the one whose sole guide to life is the quran. this is indisputable.
    now before you rave on about christian subjugation of this or that country, let me give you a history lesson. the islamic conquests was the first and only enterprise whose primary aim was to export a religion. in all cases of christian expansion, exporting the religion was of secondary importance. commerce and national rivalries were the driving factors behind the success of western expansion. since the beginning of time, a defeated people gave up their gods in favour of the victors’, and so it was with christianity( the only exception being the jews of course). first came the traders, then the soldiers, and finally the priests. this is why western civilization will prevail. trade has always been and always will be the single greatest inducement to peace, and because christianity provides a foundation to our society, not the actual society itself, it allows our society to ebb and flow as necessity requires. islam, of course, provides not only the foundation and framework, but everything else including the proverbial kitchen sink. this is why their conquests floundered, because it offered it’s subjects little except total submission to a doctrine that most weren’t allowed to understand. islam couldn’t but stagnate and decay.
    6. anarchy does have a tag line…
    all around
    sometimes up
    sometimes down
    but always around
    pollution, are you coming to my town?
    or am i coming to yours. ha!
    we’re on different buses, pollution
    but we’re both using petrol…bombs!

  10. lest we forget says:

    hey mate, i just read that link ‘the misery of islam’. jesus, you copped a basting in the following comments. so much for trying to be objective. don’t worry, i for one, applaud your noble sentiment.
    sorry if the above seems a bit fractuous. so much could be written about every topic it becomes too time consuming.

  11. @ndy says:

    3. the bible is a result of thousands and thousands of years of oral history…

    Really? Huh. Depends which Bible, I guess. Yours, maybe (tho’ I doubt it’s the product of your own research amirite?). I understand that the King James version of the Bible is the most popular, but that doesn’t mean it’s the only. In fact, there’s lots of Bibles, none of which I can read apart from their English translations. (A knowledge of Latin, Hebrew, Ancient Greek and Aramaic is a definite advantage here.) In reality, the Bible is an amalgamation of ancient scriptures, translated into and from various ancient and modern languages (drawn from various oral traditions); in contemporary Australia, a text which is the product of many centuries of struggle, over both form and content but also interpretation and meaning. Which is a long-winded way of suggesting that it’s much moar than a hop, skip and a jump from ‘the Bible’ to an understanding of the wholly modern concept of ‘homosexuality’ as it existed in pre-literate cultures.

    To begin with, the question of ‘homosexuality’ during this period–the period, let’s say, from maybe 200,000 to approximately 5,000 years ago, or when the first traces of literature may be found–is a rather large one.

    To put it mildly.

    In addition–and most obviously–the notion that a person may be ‘a homosexual’–that is, that their identity is a product of their sexual activity–is a modern one, dating from the late nineteenth century. When Spartan men were busy fucking one another, were they ‘homosexual’, or merely warriors (perhaps of the sort amusingly portrayed in every nationalist yoof’s phantasy film 300) enacting state-endorsed forms of homosociality? By the same token, I don’t see why the prohibitions on certain forms of sexual activity, gender roles and property relations embodied in the texts of the Abrahamaic faiths can’t be just as easily interpreted as providing a religious gloss on the social structures peculiar to those times and places: the ideological expressions of materially-rooted economic, political and social realities.

    Where is the evidence that peoples in pre-literate cultures ruthlessly suppressed homosexual activity? What were the agencies that did so, and what were there weapons of mass destruction? Why do you assume that ‘tribal harmony’ and social reproduction cannot be accomplished without recourse to the ruthless liquidation of all forms of homosexual activity? Even in its own terms, your argument doesn’t make sense.

    With regards the distinctive nature of nomadic and sedentary cultures, the inherently ‘decadent’ sexuality which is a product of civilisation… Christ. I mean, God. I mean, shit. So too, the truthiness of your understanding of ancient Jewish and Arab cultures… But yeah. Later. In the meantime: wherever you go, there you are. And if things were different, they wouldn’t be the same.

    Some say a cavalry corps,
    some infantry, some, again,
    will maintain that the swift oars

    of our fleet are the finest
    sight on dark earth; but I say
    that whatever one loves, is.

    ~ Sappho, ‘To an Army Wife in Sardis’, 7th century B.C.

  12. lest we forget says:

    i hardly see how it matters what bible, when the basis of what i said is true. “…By the same token, you can find it in the Bible too…” what bible were you referring to? if you care to take off the blinkers, you’ll see i wasn’t trying to moralize the question of homosexuality, rather, just attempting to show why it is apparent in monotheistic texts.
    ‘ruthlessly excised’ is a term which could explain a variety of scenarios ie. social exclusion, segregation, exile or murder. stop thinking of extravagant rebuttals, and consider the very harsh reality of life in pre-neolithic society. i’m sure you’re learned enough not to require elucidation. your barrage of rhetorical questions is a bewildering attempt to play on a literal interpretation of a single phrase, an attribute common to fundamentalists. surely you don’t need me to break down every ambiguous comment, or are you too eager to sprout flowery rhetoric at the expense of lateral thinking.
    “With regards the distinctive nature of nomadic and sedentary cultures, the inherently ‘decadent’ sexuality which is a product of civilisation…” is that a quote? i hope not. r e a d a g a i n … c a r e f u l l y. don’t let your haste to leap to the defence of homosexuality cloud your questionable objectivity.
    speaking of objectivity, there is no “truthiness” in my understanding of history…there’s simply my understanding. as i have admonished you before, you have no hegemony on truth.

  13. lest we forget says:

    oh, i’ve got a better tag line for youse;
    when you’ve got your head up your arse
    all you’ll see is shit

  14. aussie says:

    andy means well, he knows alot, smart but at the same time he is driven by being right, im not sure wanting to be right and meaning well can happen at the same time. this is the last time i will mention his name but, Eckhart Tolle has something we all need, and even better he teaches it well, better than anyone has before, try not to judge what im saying. (“This is an elementary point which Aiden either fails to understand or chooses to ignore”). it might even cause this to happen. i suggest his book, as short clips on the internet may also cause that to happen.

  15. FLAEDO says:

    l wouldnt count your chickens just yet.

  16. FLAEDO says:

    l think that if you can read the composition of the groups supporting this event you will notice many are leftwing anarcho. These are the groups that are fighting the lslamic takeover. Your group appears to be some kind of relic stuck back in another time. This l can claim by looking at the words you use – the dated terms, and the way you juxtapose yourself against some rightwing monster that doesnt even exist. You should aquaint yourselves with the new century, if that means you need to drag your sorry asses into the present then so be it. The human rights battles were all won 50 years ago, socialism is everywhere ascendent – the only battle you throwbacks have left to fight is some useless struggle for gay marriage. You dedicate your lives to the notion that faggots should marry. You seriously are useless. lts a good thing youre living at the ass end of the world – anywhere else youd be laughed off the page.

  17. Piltdown says:

    Is this lad French?

    Nothin’ funnier than an angry Surrender Monkey.

    Defending Paris from Islam makes as much sense as defending Paris from Italian cuisine.

    By the way, when was the last time the French defended Paris from anything?

  18. FLAEDO says:

    @ Piltdown – a GRAB BAG of miscelaneous and incongruoant body parts you are – for you the annihalation of our Western Culture and its replacement with a non culture peopled by third worlders – one worlders – this is an endorsement of your existence. Well for the rest of us who recognise and appreciate that the Western Culture has no equal in all of history, even the recalibrated and re interpreted history embraced by the modernists and the fags and lesbians – only can l say to you some of us will fight you and your fucking fascist allies. The crime – and that is what it is these days in the eyes of the one worlders and pushers of the so called equalisation which is really a one way street down which the newcomers parade their cutesy folk cultures whilst decrying the c ulture of the West and spitting in our faces – the crime of existing, of being a WHITE PERSON OH MY FUCKING GOD HOW COULD YOU – this we must surrender our very existences in order to satiate the demands of people like you.

    No. We have rights too, and if our culture wasnt superior this horde of third world scum wouldnt be coming here, they would decamp their third world shitholes (the ones they created) and relocate somewhere like…China maybe. Ah yes they wont go there will they. They will only go to the West. And why? because according to snuffbrainers like you it is the West that has destroyed the very ground their countries sit upon. Everything is the fault of the West. So if this is true there can only be one reason they come here and that is to PUNISH US for our sins and RECREATE US in their own scummy image. Well Piltdownus (syndrome) fuck you. We will fight. You havent seen nothing yet. There is a new force coming amongst you. Those pseudo nazi homos in Sydney – they are useless shit. They serve only to distract your attention. Just keep moaning about the class war and other sixties shit that your dad told you about – you belong in some museum with the nazis. You’re still back there. Show me the KKK lynchings in 2010? You’re fucking useless and retarded. Maybe your mind is in the forties. No wait how stupid of me – you mind is in that quaggly pit along with the rest of your mismatched body parts waiting for the muslims to resurect you. Wait in vain. The oneworlder muslim alliance will soon be in shatters. Even some real anarchists will come to this fight – against you and all your socialist muslim one world shit for brainer compatriots. You suck like cheese.

  19. Pingback: Trouble @ Australian Defence League! | slackbastard

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.