great article - but you know what - most of us dont have brown neighbours..... the same criticism was made of the show 'friends' but in reality, it did reflect reality

Australia is predominately white. White settlers set the country up.

Despite the fact the fact that people of different colours have immigrated to Australia, and despite the constant rubbish talked about ‘multiculturalism’, the ‘white-only’ TV programmes – junk though though they are – actually reflect the Australian situation: white people do not, as a general rule, mix with non-whites or different ethnic groups. These non-whites and different ethnic groups do not mix with the host population to any significant degree because that’s the way they want it; or, that’s the way they have been encouraged to live by the loopy proponents of multiculturalism and ethnic pressure groups who have more to gain by separation. There is always tax-payer funded SBS.

Multiculturalism in Australia is just an expensive, divisive joke. There will always be Australians – meaning white Australians – and ‘others’.

The rest of the world determined that Australia is racist, claims Nazeen Hussain.

Stuff the rest of the world! The ‘rest of the world’ constitutes non-white, ex-colonies with a lifelong chip on their shoulders that are all too ready to express their own racism when it comes to any white people. Most of them have never been to Australia and don’t know what they are talking about. Oh, the Harry Connick Jnr. episode could be regarded as an exception because he is a white American. But he is a knee-jerking Left whitey of a similar ilk to our own loony Left that hates its own country.

The Indians in Nazeem’s final paragraph are the ones having an “issue” with the myth of a particular Australian ‘racism’. And I notice that the pathetic Australian soapies do, in fact, have token blacks and ethics in realistic proportion.

Anyone who is not happy with white Australian culture, but wants to live here and benefit from the values and mores of that culture, should take long look at themselves or find somewhere else to live.

What did the Romans ever do for us.

Leigh if you live in the city there are lots of Indians, Chinese and people of other races. If you live out in the country thats a different matter.

Australia is in the Asia-Pacific. It has a large Asian population and a growing Pacific Islander population. Both of these will increase over time. So suck it up.

I would like to know of any european country that has not been deemed "racist" by someone.

Written with a bit of humour. How refreshing.

Alas Nazeem, you're quite right. I was in Malaysia when the Howard Government kept that Norwegian freghter full of refugees from docking. The Malaysians I knew in education and politics were amazed. 'So they'll stay on the boat?' yep.

It's as if global media hasn't touched Australia. We're so white bread it's laughable. I used to travel quite a bit and I was always glad to come home but the insular attitude made me cringe.

You don't need to be superduper worldly wise to realise that we're in Asia and that one third of our population either came from non-caucasian nations or are non-anglo families.

Film and TV in Australia just reflects this narrow mindset.

Keep this in mind: most Australians have never talked with an Aborigine.

Sometimes it seems that there are layers and layers and layers of racism in this country, as Leigh amply demonstrates above. Between the crude name-calling and gutless attacks on individuals, and the smiley institutional racism that either excludes entirely or pigeonholes non-Anglos, I don't think that we Anglo-Celts have learnt much about our common humanity in fifty years, Left or Right.

But, meanwhile, Indigenous people have broken the barriers to their participation in urban life, other non-Anglos have asserted their rights (when I was a kid, Australian-born Chinese couldn't become citizens: one of the first funerals I ever went to was for a Chinese man born here in 1894, never a citizen of anywhere), millions of people have settled here and contributed to Australia's prosperity and their children sit alongside Anglo kids and each other's kids in schools across the country. Nobody has the monopoly on contributing to the betterment of our country.

Inter-marriage proceeds at a huge rate, particularly in the second and later generations: all my ancestors (as far as I know) were Celtic, Irish and Scots, but my kids and their descendants will all be Aboriginal as well. The great majority of the 25,000 Indigenous university graduates will marry people with whom they work and socialise, as will the children of the Vietnamese and Sudanese and Afghans and Chileans who have enriched our society over the last couple of generations, as Italians and Maltese and Greeks and Lebanese did in the previous generations.

For many Australians locked into outdated mindsets (see above), this is disturbing: as they see it, non-Anglos belong either under-foot or far away. This hostility crops out amongst the most ignorant and gutless, who crave the certainties of a status quo ante.

But as Lucy rightly says, suck it up: the great majority of us are migrants, and it's not too late for those who don't like the idea to go back to the hovels and slums where their great-grandparents came from. Let's focus on turning out coffee-coloured people by the score !

Now let's see whose nose that gets up :)

Joe Lane

Cheryl, (commenting on the Tampa) "I was in Malaysia when the Howard Government kept that Norwegian freghter full of refugees from docking. The Malaysians I knew in education and politics were amazed. 'So they'll stay on the boat?' yep."

Your comment is typical of the self-loathing Left who continually give Australia a flogging and never compare and contrast their own country's efforts against those of other countries. It is a pity that your educated Malaysian friends who were so critical of Australia at the time didn't prevail upon their own government to do better. This was Amnesty International's view of Malaysia's 'sensitivity' to refugees around that time:

"In Malaysia, the majority of those who face harassment and discrimination are those whom were termed as ‘illegal immigrants’ are migrant workers and asylum seekers/refugees. Migrant workers often become ‘undocumented’ for various reasons: either because they enter Malaysia without proper documentation, or because they lose their legal status during their stay in Malaysia.

Many ‘documented’ migrant workers including domestic workers also face various level of discrimination and denial of basic rights. Many migrant workers work and live in inadequate conditions, without access to basic services and at risk of physical and sexual abuse. They are subject to weak recruitment regulations and limited legal protection and are vulnerable to exploitation by unscrupulous recruitment agents and employers"

http://www.aimalaysia.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9

Has Malaysia since become a signatory to the 1951 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees?

BTW, I have a work colleague who is Malaysian of Chinese origin. She and her Australian husband fled Malaysia because of the discrimination and violence that would inevitably have been directed against their children.

I think that Cornflower's comments reflect the fundamental weakness in the position of those who reject greater diversity in Australia. They point out that other countries in the region have racial problems - as if that somehow excuses Australia. They also argue that pointing out our own flaws is some type of "self loathing."

This is facile. It smacks of avoiding the issue. The issue at hand is that Australia is an ethnically diverse country. As Lucy points out in the cities its diverse. I work at a uni - so trust me its diverse. This is a great thing. Homogeneity is boring. The problem is that popular media representations of Australia are all-white. That really might indicate the depth of racism in this country - after all you can judge people by what they do rather than by what they say. It also reflects a curious disjunct - the racism doesn't exist in the workplace or in people's social lives. People seem to work together and mix very freely.

But there clearly are a group of Australians who are living hyper-Anglo lives. Maybe these are the people who do the casting for tv shows like Neighbours and All Saints. Who knows? Now anybody who lives in Sydney and Melbourne will regularly see people of different races. But Neighbours doesn't reflect that. Most of the medical students are Indian, Chinese etc and there are so many Asian doctors - but All Saints doesn't reflect that. The simple answer might be that there just aren't many Asian actors. But then again.

"As a result, Australian culture remains unchanged. Arguably, racist attitudes have only hardened in recent times."
Ah the ignorance of youth. If you were an Aborigine, Torres or Pacific Islander living in the 50s and 60s and in previous decades, you would have experienced a huge change in social attitudes, all positive. Yes there are ignorant people, indigenous and non-indigenous, whose views will never change.
“the great majority of us are migrants, and it's not too late for those who don't like the idea to go back to the hovels and slums where their great-grandparents came from”
Cripes Joe, getting a little heated. Everybody, indigenous and non-indigenous, either immigrated here or their ancestors immigrated here. Some great grandparents came from hovels and slums, a lot didn’t but so what?
“Let's start by throwing out our TV's(sic). Or by casting a brown family in Neighbours.”
Nazeem you seem to be fixated with colour. Why not have a black family eg Somali, yellow family eg Vietnamese, light brown family eg Northern Indian, dark brown family eg Torres Strait Islander family all living in Ramsey Street? For what purpose? Makes as much sense as a standup Muslim comedian in Afghanistan cracking jokes about suicide bombers, gay rights and wearing a burqa.

David,

Racism doesn't exist in the workplace ?! Perhaps not the cruder forms of it, but certainly it appears that it is alive and thriving at the higher levels of bureaucracies, Black and white. For example, if an Indigenous graduate wants to work in the mainstream, they will often find enormous pressure to restrict themselves to 'their own' area, working specifically with Indigenous people or in special Indigenous units.

It seems that secondary teaching graduates especially have had a tough time getting employment in the Ed. Dept.: 'But we don't actually have any Aborigine secondary schools,' that sort of racist excuse. One was appointed to two rural secondary schools fifty kilometres apart, until he told them to shove it. Another brilliant student was not notified of a placement until the third week of term. Hey presto ! there are now very, very few Indigenous secondary teachers actually in the system, at least here in SA: perhaps 10 % of qualified Indigenous secondary teachers, and of those, the proportion confined to Aboriginal schools with secondary components is very high. One survey of placements of Indigenous nurses here found that not one had been placed in a standard hospital.

The last annual conference of Aboriginal teachers in SA was held in the late eighties, but every year, the Department funds a week-long conference (in term time) for education workers, usually in a pretty flash resort. And such devaluing of Indigenous graduates is not confined to teachers. Ignoring and/or penalising Indigenous graduates but pumping up unqualified education workers, health workers and rangers - would you suggest that there is no racism involved in this differential treatment ?

Joe Lane

Hi Joe,

No you didn't get up my nose ... I agree with you heartily but ... damn always a but eh?

I notice you didn't include Indian people or Muslim people in your groups of people who have or are enriching both their own and our collective lives by joining in with the rest of us in this place.

Was that deliberate or does it reflect a current unfortunate reality?

I think that would be a better topic for debate than whether we Australians are racists. Clearly all the evidence points to the fact we are not. And in case you are choking on that comment Nazeem, I can clearly recall in the not too distant past a 'brown' Australian being call a monkey ... right across bloody India ... without any sort of remorse or appology.

Let's hear Nazeems attitude to civil rights of women in Australia ... please.

As for the Media in Australia, especially the electronic media ... well it is an over subsidised mess full of arrogrant 'we know best' individuals who portray the worst of Australia. The whole setup needs be scrapped and something intelligent replace it. And that might be occurring apparently if current surveys are accurate Australians now spend more time on the internet than watch TV.

And KRudd and co have just given the private tv channels $250 Mil to continue with their crappy content. Astonishing really!

We are not Racist in Australia although there are groups here who clearly are. To label all of us as racists and demand we reassess our attitudes is a stupidity.

Dear Cornflower, calling me a lefty is quite odd and I'm sure people who know my fairly trenchant views on greenies and anti-populationists will attest.

I certainly wasn't holding up Malaysia as an example. Try being Indian or Chinese over there. Tough one.

No. I was thinking more about how our Asian neighbours see us. We seem at once like the worst racist aspects of South Africa in the 1940s and on the other, hang wringing do gooders.

It seems that we don't have much collective vision past the corner shop.

It will take alot more than a few brown faces to fix Neighbours. Sexist crap like that is probably beyond saving.

David Jennings, "I think that Cornflower's comments reflect the fundamental weakness in the position of those who reject greater diversity in Australia. They point out that other countries in the region have racial problems - as if that somehow excuses Australia. They also argue that pointing out our own flaws is some type of "self loathing."

What absolute rubbish, I was replying to Cheryl who quoted some Malaysian friends who were critical of Australian policy specifically in relation to Tampa. Go back to the context, there is a clear implication that Malaysia's policy and ethics were superior to Australia's which was and is damned nonsense and needed to be outed as such.

You know nothing about my views and did not have the decency to ask, being more interested to setting up a straw horse to bolster your own argument which was unrelated to Tampa.

No, I think I articulated and rebutted your views pretty accurately. Its not my fault if you can't make a good argument. Cheryl's comment actually doesn't contain the implication that you suggest. So in fact it was you who set up a straw man.

Joe we're on the same side. In the workplaces I've been in things have been fine. But your examples are equally valid.

Keith's comment is actually very indicative of the intellectual poverty of the racists. Kaith doesn't want to answer for racist white Australians - fair enough. But then he suggests that Nazeem should share his views on women etc. Why? So that Nazeem can reflect the "Muslim" viewpoint? Keith also suggests that Indians and Muslims don't enrich Australian society. Really?? A lot of them hold down good jobs, pay their taxes and obey the law. Thats fine by me. Keith also fails to mention the number of Indians who apologised to Andrew Symonds when he was in India. You have to tell the whole truth in a debate.

Malaysia? That's where Vietnamese boat people were machined-gunned when they tried to land. I'm fairly tough and cynical, but I felt quite ill as I watched an ABC documentary about a Vietnamese-Australian family who returned to the spot in Malaysia where they buried their two children after their boat was sunk by Malaysian forces. The then Malaysian PM was the biggest pig in the region.

Some of the clowns who post here are too busy calling people 'racists' to realise that that we are not talking about how many people from different cultures have come here, nor how many will come here in the future. As our neighbours are Asians (we are not an Asian country by any stretch of the imagination) it is fairly natural that we will get a fair percentage of Asian immigrants with something to offer us. But, the UK is still our largest source of immigrants.

Australia still is, and will be for a long time, an Anglo-type country with other compatible Europeans whose values and customs are the same. The non-white immigrants came here presumably because they thought our way of life was better than they experienced in their countries of origin. The majority of them, while privately carrying on with the parts of their enculturation they cannot or do not want to let go of, (perfectly acceptable) mostly seem to accept that it is not their place to try to change Australia to suit their varying cultures when they know full well that they came here to get away from their past. If they every return to their former countries, they will hardly recognise them, and they will be glad to return ‘home’ to Australia.

We seem to have had a sudden influx into OLO of Generation Y’s, who wouldn’t know if their backsides were on fire, but who still think that they know it all, despite their relatively short time on earth and their total ignorance of history and anything that happened before they graced us with their presence

The Television and Film Industry in Australia has endured fierce competition over the years in addition to being a small country with Banks and loaning institutions turning down many programs and projects. Govt plays a large part in relation to our imports and exports of programs. The original neighbours programs were made well over 15 yrs ago+ when there may not have been many "brown skinned" Australian Actors and Actresses of Indian or middle eastern origins. Similarly other archaic Ozzie silly soapies I've never viewed.

However, I do recall Neighbours [many years ago] had cast a European or was it a middle Eastern girl [and "brown-skinned"]to play a major part in Neighbours. Another Australian male of middle eastern origins also played a visiting part by memory.

Australian family viewing has changed dramatically over the past twenty years with competition of foxtel and newer technology constantly. Many families view foxtel programs [my children do not watch anything other than certain programs on foxtel] nor do my other Australian friends with European, middle eastern and Indian backgrounds. They too for many years have raised their children viewing Foxtel programs.

Some Aussies "love" the old pommy Coronation Street, Faulty Towers, UK police and crime shows. Some Aussies "love" watching the yanky soapies and programs. Some Aussies prefer the hot italian and french shows [I caught one years ago feeding my daughter]. Many Aussies "love" watching movies that include all nationalities with great storylines in their programs.

In a nutshell; I would not take the line or view and concern yourself to generalise that half or more of the Australian population are sitting down viewing Australian soapies and programs watching primarily white skinned Ozzie actors and actresses. No way.

The average Ozzie works 7-12 hour days anyway and misses most of the soapie rubbish put on TV. Most children are into their new technology of the internet, facebook, play station games, weii games, sport and other interests and activities; therefore this young multicultural generation should not be affected by the issues highlighted in your views/observations.

Back to the article ... yes we do need much more racial variety on TV. Compared to US and UK programs, ours is embarrassingly vanilla and not in the slightest representative of the mix of people we see walking down the street each day. Trouble is, our television writers seem to be at full stretch writing for white people. Not sure they could handle the extra challenge. Though we have had one Aboriginal doctor, on MDA, but he was shockingly stereotyped.

What irks me is that we rarely comment on the blatant racial bias on TV, but when someone suggests something sensible, like testing overseas students to make sure they can speak English well enough to study, we are labelled racists. Has anyone spoken to an Indian, Pakistani or Sri Lankan? Many of them can speak much better English than us.

Leigh: << There will always be Australians – meaning white Australians – and ‘others’. >>

I don't think I've read many more succinct expressions of Aussie racism. We don't need a straw man in this debate - Leigh's volunteered for the role.

<< Stuff the rest of the world! >>

Not to mention good old Aussie insular xenophobia!

On the article, I think that Nazeem Hussain makes some valid - if humorous - observations about Australian society. I watch very little commercial TV, but I have spent plenty of time in Australian hospitals where, as Hussain says, there always seem to be numerous doctors of 'brown' or 'yellow' complexion. If they are not represented on 'All Saints' then that could well indicate a racist bias on the part of whoever it is that creates the show.

Cheryl - I don't think Malaysia is a very good example of the humane and equitable treatment of asylum seekers. Even the appalling Tampa incident wasn't as bad as the treatment meted out to asylum seekers by the Malaysian government - which operates by virtue of a blatantly racist constitution.

Joe Lane and David Jennings - well said. David, it's one of Cornflower's standard rhetorical ploys to try and steer discussions off on tangents where she can engage in ill-informed or outright mendacious ad hominem attacks on others. You're right though, it is an attempt to avoid the issues raised in Hussain's article.

Keith's comment is the typically disingenuous racist dross we've come to expect from him. He doesn't want to answer for racist 'white' Australians because he's one of them.

Thanks for a stimulating and amusing article, Nazeeem.

David Jennings

It was Nazeem who introduced the topic of Islam into this discussion. I responed to that by then pointing to his own great deficiency. That doesn't make me racist.

I think you missed the point though. I'll spell it out for you. Nazeem is Muslim Australian who does't share entirely our viewpoint on civil liberties for woman yet he dares to lecture us on what he sees as our racist society. What's that adage about the kettle and the pot ... I dare not use the word black or you'll go into a real tizz about racist remarks won't you Divad.

My point is entirely valid and not racist.

Please re-read my observation about Joe's remarks. Then apologise. You are attributing an attitude to me I don't hold and haven't expressed.

Those who didn't apologise to Andrew Symons included the entire Indian Cricket Board, all the Indian TV Channels, the Indian Eleven... and the Indin cricketer involved. But sure there are bound to be a few non-racists in India who would have apologised for racist attitude on display.

Why do you lack the decency to behave appropriately in these forums?

CJ
You are entirely free to feel guilt about your own hate of others,

but leave me out of that meanspirited attitude and go to hell.

Now Keith it takes a remarkable lack of self awareness, to request an apology for being criticised for remarks that are clearly racist. Its even more remarkable when you back it up in the same post with some further racist remarks.

Keith wrote:

"Nazeem is Muslim Australian who does't share entirely our viewpoint on civil liberties for woman yet he dares to lecture us on what he sees as our racist society."

You have no evidence that Nazeem holds views on women or anything else that are out of step with those of other Australians. You then go even further to say - and this is priceless - "Why do you lack the decency to behave appropriately in these forums?" Uh huh. So you make racist statements about Muslims and Indians and thats not inappropriate? Well, maybe its appropriate given some of the racist tripe that gets posted on Online Opinion. But whats even funnier is that after your comment about appropriate behaviour you then told CJ Morgan to "go to hell." Shameful - especially since CJ is always polite and thoughtful.

Since I'm a cricket fan I take issue with this pearler of a quote:

"Those who didn't apologise to Andrew Symons included the entire Indian Cricket Board, all the Indian TV Channels, the Indian Eleven... ..sure there are bound to be a few non-racists in India who would have apologised..."

That's a wrong-un because some of the Indians who apologised privately came from the afore-mentioned groups. But where you are completely leg-before is in your admission that there were Indians who apologised to Symonds but you seemed to tar all Indians in your first post. You can't get that one past Hawkeye.

Leigh, get over it. Some of us who were born in Gen X are perfectly used to mixing with people of other races and we like it. Diversity is great.

CJ Morgan, thanks for an excellent summation of the thread and for your insights. Lucy, Cheryl, Joe, Candide, Unique - well said as well

Hi Nazeem. I responded last night and lost the post after spending 15 minutes writing then another 20 minutes editing. Perhaps for the best it did not make it as I intend now to be short and concise.

1. Many families and their children these days either view Foxtel, sit and play playstation games, spend spare time on Facebook or the internet, play sport, study, socialise with friends and the many families I am friends with of all different origins, generally view one or two commercial tv programs that are favourites; Neighbours definitely not one of them. Neighbours was made well over 15 years ago from memory [didnt Kylie Minogue star as Charlene back then]? There may not have been many Australian Actors and Actresses from Indian or MiddleEastern origins around to be cast into a role. Although, I do recall an Aust man of Middle Eastern origins featuring in Neighbours years ago and another woman as his wife. Perhaps you could highlight your viewpoints to the Australian Television Industry to find out the reasons based upon your claims.

2. The Aust Film and TV Industry has suffered fierce competition over the past 20 yrs as a result of Foxtel and other television viewing alternatives. Many Aust families view Foxtel programs; many of which are being produced o/s. Therefore I would not be too concerned about Australians of all origins feeling "upset or excluded" from not viewing "brown skinned" Australians of Indian or Middle Eastern origins on commercial television soapies or programs such as Win Ten etc. I have not viewed any programs for well over ten years with the exception of Foxtel and the News on TV occasionally.

"Shameful - especially since CJ is always polite and thoughtful."
Cripes CJ I hope you will correct Mr Jenning's erroneous view.

C J Morgan, "it's one of Cornflower's standard rhetorical ploys to try and steer discussions off on tangents where she can engage in ill-informed or outright mendacious ad hominem attacks on others."

What rot and others can judge for themselves. This is what I said:

"..I was replying to Cheryl who quoted some Malaysian friends who were critical of Australian policy specifically in relation to Tampa. Go back to the context, there is a clear implication that Malaysia's policy and ethics were superior to Australia's which was and is damned nonsense and needed to be outed as such."

This is what CJ said later:

"Cheryl - I don't think Malaysia is a very good example of the humane and equitable treatment of asylum seekers. Even the appalling Tampa incident wasn't as bad as the treatment meted out to asylum seekers by the Malaysian government - which operates by virtue of a blatantly racist constitution."

After reading my comment, Cheryl gave further explanation and fair enough that is how she feels.

CJ, there is no need to bend it to pay out on me or anyone else. Lose the grudges and enjoy life, passion in argument is welcome, but no-one here should be playing for sheep stations.

David Jennings

A ? indicates a question. Not a statement nor an expression of an opinion.

Of course you're not too proud to admit error and not mirred in the blight of intractability shared by the bitter and hateful old...
With your open mind you will see how my generation has changed the outlook of Australia over the last thirty years.

Look at your grandparents attitudes. Assess whether they are different to yours. If they are different then try to assess how the change occurred. Then assess what the future of Australia is ... for each preceeding generation teaches the next. If they are really smart they will understand their own shortcomings and ensure their children do not suffer them.

That is a key element in understanding how western culture has survived and thrived. It's adaptability. It might surprise you Indigenous culture has the same great strength.

Nazem's Islam limits his ability to make choices and change those things that are abhorrent, for his religion is a way of life ... without choice and adaptability. He cannot choose just parts of Islam.

In western culture individuality and choice is paramount. Not so in Islam. Explore this aspect and understand that Nazeem cannot life live as both a westerner and a Muslim. It's impossible.

One basic tenet of westernism derives from Christ. 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'.

That is reflected in our legal system. Check out the legal concept of 'clean hands'. The best way to understand it is tht if you seek a judgement in our courts you must appear with 'clean hands'. Say Nazeem wanted to sue me for discrimination well he would have to be prepared to show that he wasn't also discriminatory.

Another adaptation is the old adage 'people in glasshouses ...'

You see these are the sorts of things that make us Australian. It's part of our great egalitarinism. Now assess whether Nazeem shares those types of basic tenets, which do enrich our lives. Challenge him to embrace those tenets because of their basic goodness.

His responnse would enlighten you greatly.

I guess keith's latest bigoted offering is more properly described as Islamophobic rather than racist, although he did give the game away when he linked "Indians and Muslims" in his first effort. Now he not only knows what Nazeem Hussain thinks about women - despite the fact that this is not mentioned in the article - but he also knows how Hussain would respond if challenged about Islam.

Keith also imagines that I feel "guilt" about my "hatred of others". Sorry to burst your bubble mate, but I neither feel guilty nor do I hate anybody. Your hatefulness, on the other hand, is evident in almost everything you post at OLO.

I see that Cornflower's still off on her tangent, without having posted anything at all that pertains to Hussain's article. Do you have anything to contribute to the debate about the article, or are you going to persist in your usual trick of diverting the discussion off topic? You do it in just about every thread in which you participate - maybe you're unaware of it.

David Jennings - thanks for the kind words. I do try and be polite and thoughtful in my posts here, but I confess that I'm occasionally less than polite towards trolls and persistent haters.

CJ Morgan

You are one of the reasons I have not given up on OLO entirely. While illness plagues me from time to time (to the point that I cancelled my last moniker and one has to create a new one - resurrection not supported by Graham Young), you are among the most honest and consistent posters here.

The salient point made by Hussain:

<<< When the Hey Hey sketch made international news the only people given space in the Australian media to discuss whether blackface was offensive or not were white people. >>>

Is again reflected here on OLO - vanilla posters - myself included.

When he wrote:

<<< When it comes to conversations about issues concerning women, men in our community grab the microphone. >>>

While I am always interested in the male perspective - I would prefer to hear more from women about women - for example listening to the likes of Abbott rabbit on about women's sexuality is not what I want from the Liberal Party - its women remain remarkably silent.

Hussain is quite correct that Australian television does not reflect Australian reality. Recently, in hospital, my anaesthetist was Indian, my surgeon Vietnamese, the nursing staff were in a variety of colours, all were wonderful.

Looking forward to checking out "Fear of a Brown Planet Returns" this year in Melbourne.

Thank you

CJ,

Are you back from hell already? Devil reject you did she?

Ever wonder why I don't bother debating you?

It's simple I never argue with fools.

Severin,

I too have seen the huge numbers of races involved on the hospital system. It's great. As usual no doubt it's the attraction of the advanced nature of another western science leading the world that encourages and enables their desire to practice in the west. Eh?

I bet the avowed anti-westerners and self-loathers here choke on the implications of that comment?

Don't these blokes realise that Western Culture is something of which to be proud. Especially of it's ability to accept, intergrate and develop the best of the differences of so many cultures. That's caused it's strength, growth and persistence.

But the self-loathers in their narrow minded ways see that as a put down of others and not a highlighting of the majesty of Westernism.

Oh whatever would the self-loathers do if their pathetic little worrys and needs weren't able to be catered for. I've met their sad sorry little type in many places in Australia. Usually they are the first to make a grab for the benefits of westernism all the while slandering and disavowing it's greatness.

Now watch as they go straight for highlighting the few little bits of misery it sometimes creates. Watch as they never assess a balance. They won't do that because they know in their heart of hearts any balance would be heavily skewed toward the betterments westernism fosters.

They really do wallow in an abject poverty all of their own making. And of course their only real response to positivity is to try to drag everybody down to their levels of gutter residence.

Keith, your posts show you to be an unpleasant person. For the record, you are wrong on the anti-discrimination laws. Nazeem could sue you for racial vilification and he wouldn't have to prove anything about his own views on culture, women etc.

Keith

You claim:

<<<< I too have seen the huge numbers of races involved on the hospital system. It's great. As usual no doubt it's the attraction of the advanced nature of another western science leading the world that encourages and enables their desire to practice in the west. Eh? >>>>

If western culture is so transformative, how come you remain such a bigot? Eh?

races involved on the hospital system..
Severin,
There's nothing really spectacular about this. It's simply to uphold the Government stipulated quota of at least 8% of indigenous employment within the health system. By employing others as well helps give the impression of a multicultural environment. The question of qualification is not part of the equation, appearance is what matters to the bureaucrats. If you don't believe me look up Qld Health Job adverts in small regional newspapers.
Another thing to remember is that, as soon as an indigenous achieves position they leave for the bigger centres to keep climbing the career ladder very much as every bureaucrat & professional. They can not achieve higher position by remaining in a community & are literally forced to move on. It's the snake eating itself by the tail. Until living in the bush is made somewhat more glamorous or financially rewarding you'll simply not get professional people staying there. Life in the remote regions does not really cater for greed & ego but it's a lifestyle choice for decent folk.

Lucy

your only other post here calls on someone who has a different view to you to ‘suck it up’ … i.e. your view that Australia is going to become Asian and South Pacific Islander dominated? On the evidence of that I doubt very much you know many Australian Asians or Australian South Pacific Islanders.
And you call me unpleasant. LOl where’s that black pot?

Severin,

Bigot: n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.
Well it's true! I am strongly partial to my Westernism … Aren’t you to yours also?
It’s also true I am tolerant of differing creeds, races, beliefs and opinions. In fact I’m tolerant of ALMOST everybody who differs from me.
The only exception is I am intolerant of people who are intolerant. (See CJ) And that my friend, i.e. tolerance of intolerance, is something I will never condone in any way.
It is the great question westernism is encountering at present.
How far should we go in tolerating those views which would undo the very fabric of our liberal westernism. Do we tolerate those who would only extend civil rights to some members of their groups and demand we do the same? In regard to Muslims, it’s where Europeans are drawing a line. The French are demanding Muslim French women are accorded the same rights as every other French woman … at least in public. The Danes, the most liberal Europeans, are resisting the minority of 5% of their population who are demanding the introduction of Sharia law. They understand Sharia Law undermines the rights and privileges of liberal westernism. They are curbing Muslim immigration, introducing compulsory Danish culture classes for immigrants, now require a 7 year period of residency before granting citizenship and are insisting on maintaining the dominant expression of Danish culture in their homeland.

Oh that’s right I’m intolerant of Islam… damn right I am opposed to those parts of it that express intolerance! Why aren’t you?

Gee why don’t you read more widely we’d communicate more easily

Hi Severin - welcome back to OLO, and thanks for the encouragement. You don't happen to ride a motorcycle, do you?

There's little point in trying to have a debate with anybody as avowedly and obviously bigoted as keith. It's kind of ironic that he acknowledges the 'racial' diversity of hospital staff, but then completely fails to link that with one of Hussain's central points, i.e. that they are almost completely absent from commercial TV dramas like 'All Saints' that purport to portray a typical Australian hospital.

Lucy, I don't debate with abusive haters like keith, but I do feel compelled to point out their bigotry in discussions like this. His efforts in this thread are standard operating procedure for him, being abusive and self-contradictory in turn. At least it's slightly amusing watching him tying himself up in ideolological knots.

individual - you didn't actually read the article, did you? Your comment has very little relevance to the issues that Nazeem Hussain raises.

CJ

I haven't ridden a motorcyle for a while now, but still hold a licence.

:)

The point of Nazeem Hussain's article has completely sailed over the heads of both Keith and Individual, being the absence of racial diversity in Australian media, therefore not reflective of the reality of life here in the land of OZ. Instead Keith has attempted to use the article as a vehicle in which to push his white-supremacy views - hence he was called a bigot.

Not much more need be said, except that I hope Nazeem continues to contribute his entertaining articles and to thank you for welcoming me back.

Cheers

No probs CJ. I don't think you're obligated to be nice to the racists and the trolls. Cheers.

Severin

First you call me a bigot. I point out what a bigot actually is. You realise I don't fit that definition andswitch to calling me a white supremist.

What a joke.

Thinking people who don't have issues with race, unlike all my critic's here, know I don't give a stuff about colour or creed. Nothing I've said in here indicates I have in any way.

Those people realise I revel in the culture I have been born into, just as Nazeem does in his and ... well anybody except you westernist haters does that ...

I am tolerant of everything except intolerance... unlike you westernist haters ... who cannot tolerate anybody who expresses opinion that shows a love of western culture.

Open up your narrow minds and stop calling we, the revellers in the diversity of life, silly inaccurate names.

Intelligent people just laugh at that, as it only reveals your own really unusual issues with race. (In much the same way as a Freudian Slip).

Nazeem has the same opinions of his own cultural background as I have of mine.
There is only one difference between Nazeems opinions and mine.

He generalises and condemns all Australians as racists on the basis of the behaviour and expressions of an unrepresentative few ... the media and Sam Newman ... like really doh!
I specifically only condemn parts of Nazeems self-avowed religion, those that openly engender discrimination and advocate intolerance. My reasons for that are cultural not racial.

My point is his religion and cultural background determines his behaviour just as my irreligious views and cultural background determine mine. (Please note there is nothing racial in that at all).

Nazeems point is that the behaviour of a few 'white' (Nazeems word) Australians determines my behaviour.

And that Lucy is racial discrimination and would see him condemned by any Anti Dscrimination Commission in Australia.

You bloody conclusion jumping hypocritical fools have given me some great laughs over the last few days.

Thanks it's why I love Australia so much ... we tolerate that sort of eccentric behaviour.

Keith, get a life. Your views have been fairly comprehensively dissected over the past few days. Most of your claims are baseless and your statements about Nazeem are fairly offensive. If you disagree with Nazeem thats one thing, but you've said some pretty slanderous things about him in this thread.

Children, behave yourselves ! Let's get back to the topic.

Keith has actually asked a very relevant question: should one tolerate the intolerant ? He's not the first, some anthropologists have asked it about 'their' groups for a few years now, and usually run a mile from the answer.

And how does this square with the scope of freedom of expression, which MUST include the freedom to make offensive remarks ?

Since a bit of ad hominem seems to be obligatory on this forum, yes, I think Keith is probably an ignorant, Hansonite troglodyte. But he does pose a very significant issue for us :) No offense, Keith.

Joe Lane

the blackfaces on Hey Hey were Indian Doctors.

What's the problem then?

Yes, double checked no skilled migration for actors so perhaps we wait a few generations perhaps? All the actors are performing surgery at the moment and have no desire to give up big money for art.(or a porr substitute for it).

Keith,

Whatever gave you the idea that onlineopinion is a site where you can state your online opinion? Have you gone crazy? Please stop doing this at once, right now. If you persist in stating your opinions online here you will be shouted down and personally critisized by the local uneducated gestapo. Mind you they will never give any hard evidence to back up their politically correct views. So once again I must ask you to contain yourself and your views.

Thanks.

"Let's start by throwing out our TV's. Or by casting a brown family in Neighbours."

Yeah, they could do an episode on honour killings. They could also do an episode where poor uncle Abdullah dies as a result of a mysterious explosion in his garage....Maybe Bilal Skaf could do a cameo for them....http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=id9nutw-HYI&feature=player_embedded

over the heads of both Keith and Individual.

Simply pointing at some facts which DO relate to his article. On one hand you claim Aust TV reflects our society but on the other hand if a little of this Aust Society fact is thrown in you're thrown off balance. I find it just so appalling that a 24 year old in this day & age can still be so so isolated in mind that he accuses the society which adopted him & his out of date beliefs, of doing what he himself practices. Being hypocritical. The worst is that at 24 he still requires to be led by others' thinking. I have always stated that Aust TV in general is of very low intellect but then again that's where the money is. Looking at entertainment on a global scale I think you'll find the non white content to be proportional to population to each country. Don't condemn a presently still european society for playing its own when other societies play their own. After all much of this industry is based on european invention but readily copied by those who condemn it. Don't blame us if you can't do it yourself. It's simply the hypocrisy bandwagon steaming up again for the same mindless destination.

David Jennings,

I have a wonderful western life! But you mean I should get some sad-sack morbid influence into it. Eh?

No-one has even challenged my views, let alone dissected them. What's occurred is the Westernism loathers, for who it impossible to present factual and logical rebuttals, started a campaign of silly name-calling.

Btw I see you're too proud to admit and face your error. Continue as such and you'll end up like poor sad hateful CJ. His posts in any thread always contain personal criticism of those who don't share his views.

You need a definition of Slander ... and another lesson.

The Legal definition of slander includes the phrase ... defamation by oral utterance rather than by writing, pictures, etc.

Back to the name calling-factory for you. Lol perhaps you'll meet Severin either coming or going ... as I doubt either of you would know coming from going.

Loudmouth, the best is always last. lol. Mate I haven't taken offense but I enjoyed a hearty laugh. There is absolutely no doubt about your claim ... I'll confirm it's totally inaccurate.

Have you caught up with those running anthropologists yet, the ones running from their answers to difficult questions? You haven't answered my direct question from my earlier post. This one, it's the same one David got confused over.

'I notice you didn't include Indian people or Muslim people in your groups of people who have or are enriching both their own and our collective lives by joining in with the rest of us in this place.

Was that deliberate or does it reflect a current unfortunate reality?'

Or was it merely a Freudian Slip. Often what we don't say conveys more about us than what we do say. As a result I'm asking myself are you (a closet) bigotted racist, Loudmouth?
I'd love you to sit down think about it and respond intelligently to the very fair question.
Lol some would say 'fair' was a bit of good ol'e coded 'dog-whistling'

I meant slander in the colloquial sense not the legal sense. After all, why would I give you legal advice? If you need a lawyer you can go and pay for such services yourself. At any rate I think your repeated comments on Nazeem have crossed a line and are out of step with the forum's rules.

Sadly, Nazeem also seems to have attracted the attention of some rather disturbing far-right people. They appear to migrating to OLO from Facebook.

But anyway I'm celebrating. Pauline Hanson is leaving the country and I'm in the mood for some champagne! As a multiculturalist I'll make it the imported kind rather than the domestic. After all I have little or no interest in preserving low wage domestic jobs ;-)

David,

Look I think you have a beaut future if you would drop the adherece to socialist dogma.

Have a read of this. It's still my attitude to multi-culturalism.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=4097

Pauline Hanson, while I rejected her politics, I thought her courage added to the rich fabric of Australia. The loss of anyone, with such courage from Australia, lessens us all. Dropping meanspiritedness is something true adults learn to do.

Libel is the written form of defamation. I have represented myself and other family members in courts and tribunals in Australia on a few occassions. As a layman I'm very proud of the fact the courts usually found in our favour. I don't seek legal advice except from experts and have found the 'Bench' under common law is bound to offer intrepretions of points of law if asked.

Yep I think you might gain appreciation of my ability if you read and dissect the views I've published in On Line Opinion.

Enjoy your Champagne, next year I'm sailing to France and intend to spend at least a year cruising the canals of France... I'll drink champagne to celebrate that achievement.

No I'm not lucky but I've worked bloody hard.

It is just a silly argument. Recent migrants simply do not persue acting as a career. We have seen the success of Greek and Italian migrants in show business and soon enough the more recent arrivals will probably join them if they so wish. There is totally not one bit of evidence given that all these actors are turning up and being discriminated against. We have Jamie Durrie, Guy Sebastian and Kamhal all enjoyed success as Sri Lankans, Marci Hines and Trish Goddard have been well received. In fact I would go as far to say they have had higher representation in show business than in volunteer work. SES etc is white as.

If we are going to hear all this crying well at the very least support it with facts. Have "brown" actors who are good at their craft been discriminated against? If so then they have laws on their side to address that. Has that happened or are we seeing a self imposed victim mentality at play?

The Missus

Heh. heh, how naughty of you to say let the market rule.

The demand is for the State to step in to force 'positive' discrimination upon the industry along the lines of the 'positive' discrimination against white men in employment in Victoria.

It comes as no surprise that the supporters of 'diversity' are silent about the very obvious ethnic diversity in the many US and UK shows that are shown daily on Australian television. Much of the 'local' content is comprised of children's shows such as quizzes and Play School, where Australia's multiculturalism is obvious.

Then there are the ABC and SBS channels. It is regrettable that there are no accolades here for Australia's multicultural and multilingual broadcaster, the SBS.

I think the 'problem' has nothing to do with any presumed 'racism' or desire for Anglo dominance in Australian film and television, rather that traditionally there are few opportunities and very little turnover in actors and celebs anyhow.

Australia is small beer and few hopefuls can made a decent living out of acting. Even the stars have day jobs to keep body and soul together. Writers? How do they make a living?

Much of the pap on TV comes from overseas - commercial considerations.

Who wouldn't be in favour of new blood to replace Tracey Grimshaw and the ACA hasbeens, Bert Newton and those boring cricket commentators who have been around since Adam was a boy? Like others, I do get tired of the same actors in Australian productions. Presumably these presenters and actors don't change for commercial reasons or because few people can afford to be actors in Australia.

As you say, the opportunities are there for any talent to come forward, however in the intensely competitive Australian market with few opportunities to earn a decent living it would be most unfortunate if talent alone wasn't the deciding criterion.

TheMissus: << It is just a silly argument. >>

Quite so, and it gets sillier with each comment you post.

Speaking of silly, I wonder how keith reconciles his prejudice against an individual Muslim with his claim from a few years back to be tolerant and to support multiculturalism ? Multiculturalism and tolerance are good, so long as it doesn't include Muslims and Islam, I guess.

individual: << the society which adopted him & his out of date beliefs >>

Individual would undoubtedly be surprised to learn that, unlike him, Nazeem Hussain is a born and bred Aussie. He was born in Australia, a country in which Islam has been present since well before Federation.

I wish some of these migrants would learn a bit about Australia before they come here and start trying to impose their ignorant beliefs on us </irony>

TheMissus: << It is just a silly argument. >>

<<Quite so, and it gets sillier with each comment you post.>>

why exactly is that? What evidence?

What I really despise is victimisation. I saw this happen with Indigenous people and the results horrify me. Paternal racism which you are guilty of is the the most toxic of all racism in Australia. I want it stamped out.

a born and bred Aussie.
CJ Morgan,
am I far off the mark by guessing that you're one of those who got as far as BA & ended up in the Public Service ? As for Nazeem & his true colours well, he's put forward his whole Kaleidoscope for all to see.
Btw, are you capable of actually answering any questions or do you just keep an eye open for opportunistic loophole arguments ?

TheMissus - your comments are silly because you appear to be attempting to claim that the relative absence of 'brown' characters in TV dramas that purport to portray Australian life is because of a shortage of 'brown' actors. You then compound the silliness by babbling inanely about recent migrants. Daft.

individual: << am I far off the mark by guessing that you're one of those who got as far as BA & ended up in the Public Service ? >>

Way off.

Now that I've done you the courtesy of answering your irrelevant question, perhaps you could answer the one I asked of you a week or two ago. You've variously stated at OLO that you're a "newcomer" to this country and also that you've had 30 years' experience working in Indigenous communities. Which is true?

"newcomer" to this country and also that you've had 30 years' experience working in Indigenous communities. Which is true?
Cj Morgan
Both correct. I am a newcomer in the sense that I wasn't born here. i.e. a johnny come lately so far as building this nation is concerned.

Thats an extraordinarily generous interpretation of the word "newcomer". Somewhat reminiscent of the teenagers on Beverly Hills 90210!

individual: << I am a newcomer in the sense that I wasn't born here. i.e. a johnny come lately so far as building this nation is concerned. >>

Thanks for the explanation.

If you've been here for 30 years, I don't think anybody would regard you as a "newcomer". Indeed, if you've taken up citizenship then you're as Aussie as anybody. On the other hand, the fact that Nazeem Hussain was born here doesn't make him any more of an Aussie than you are.

In any case, Australia's nationhood is only a bit over 100 years old, and you've been here for nearly a third of that time. Indeed, many would argue that Australia's nationhood is still a work in progress, given that we still haven't to assert independence without reference to our colonial past.

Cj

'I wonder how keith reconciles his prejudice against an individual Muslim with his claim from a few years back to be tolerant and to support multiculturalism ? Multiculturalism and tolerance are good, so long as it doesn't include Muslims and Islam, I guess.'

There you go again. Aren't you indicative of an individual who stereotypes people and shows a closed mind by an inability to accept individuals are able to hold opinions some of which appear, according to your misguided intrepretation, in conflict and some in agreement with your own.

How sad I don't fit your simpleminded stereotyping. So it must be I either must have changed opinions or am compromising my beliefs, in your simple thoughtless way!

Fool it is simple really. I am not and never have been intolerant of Islam or Muslims. I am however intolerant of those aspects of Islam and of Muslim behaviour that are discriminatory.

Boy some people are just too thick and stuck in dogma to face changed times, circumstances and the dynamic nature of people and ideas!

That's why you are so negative and carpingly critical of real thinkers isn't it CJ? You just cannot fathom complexity can you?

Take note David Jennings ... for this is your future.

CJ,

I didn't see you decrying this woman as aprejudiced racist anywhere. Why not? She mirrors my opinion on Islam and some of it's intolerances. Have a read of this.

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8672

Please explain your inconsistancy.

lol you won't it's too confronting for you. You really have lost touch with todays world haven't you?

Keith having read the article that you claim is yours I came to the following conclusions: (i) either you have dramatically revised your view on multiculturalism, or (ii) you've gone and dug up an article by some poor person whose name also happens to be Keith or (iii) you've really got something against Nazeem. I did think it a bit strange that the grammar and expression in the articles by Kennelly was reasonably good whereas the grammar and expression in a number of your posts has been sub-standard. But I'll never know for sure. So it does not matter and I can grant you the benefit of the doubt. Either way its hard to take you seriously. As Cindi Lauper once said, "I can see your true colours shining through..." and its not pretty.

My future is perfectly fine. I like people regardless of their ethnic or cultural background and I judge people by what they say and do.

Poor old confused keith.

<< Aren't you indicative of an individual who stereotypes people >>

I haven't stereotyped anybody - rather, I've called you on doing precisely that when you attribute to Nazeem Hussain attitudes towards women, on the basis of his being a Muslim rather than anything he's said or done. Neither you nor I know what Hussain's ideas about women are, but that doesn't stop you writing ignorant rubbish like this:

<< Nazeem is Muslim Australian who does't share entirely our viewpoint on civil liberties for woman >>

How do you know this? Answer: you don't - rather, you assume that because Hussain is Muslim, then he must conform to the caricatured stereotype of a Muslim patriarch.

Interesting that you should point to one of Chris James' silly articles. Had you bothered to look at the comments thread you would have noticed that I criticised her Islamophobic dog-whistling. I note that you didn't comment on that article at all.

I hope you have a nice time in France. However, you should be warned that there are many more Muslims there than there are here.

<< Nazeem is Muslim Australian who does't share entirely our viewpoint on civil liberties for woman >>

Really?

I doubt Keith got any further in reading the article than beyond the author's name. If he had he would've read the following:

<<<< When it comes to conversations about issues concerning women, men in our community grab the microphone. Sometimes it's important to hear from men concerning women, but more often than not we could do without their two cents worth. Palpably, men are part of the problem. So, sometimes we should shut up. >>>>

Which is progressive thinking from any man of any ideological background.

Interesting how the Keiths of this world love to rant about the primitive attitudes towards women from the Islamic religion, yet never critique the likes of Pell and other equally primitive Christians. As for speaking up on OLO when women are continually denigrated by the same few men - the silence is all encompassing.

David Jennings,
Wrong you are judging me according to your interpretation of what I said. And I pointed out to you that your interpretation was wrong and asked you for an apology. Of course you’ve shown you’ve been too proud to acknowledge your error.

In actual fact you have judged me after applying your simplistic stereotyping.

Mate if you doubt my integrity say so … don’t beat around the bush like a cowardly child. Rest assured I’m the author. You’ll never be taken seriously while you continue to exhibit blind pig-headedness.

CJ

you said you
'think that the formal recognition of any aspect of Sharia Law in Australia would have negative consequences, both for those who availed themselves of it - particularly women - and for the wider society.'

and
'If the author wanted to make the point that aspects of Sharia Law (and indeed fundamentalist religious belief of any description) are incompatible with the advances in gender equity that Western societies have experienced over the past 30 years or so, she could have done so far more successfully if she'd avoided the Islamophobic dog-whistles.'
and this pearler
'There's no question that any versions of Sharia Law that I've seen render women as subordinate to men...'
and this
'Religious jurisdiction should never impinge upon the rights and obligations lawfully afforded to individuals who are not followers of that religion, or who have ceased to follow religions - or who simply wish to disregard the rules of their religion for whatever reason.'

and this
'... from what I understand to be the object of those nutters who want to impose Sharia Law on them.'

Do you realise the logical conclusion to these statements is that you agree with the positions of both James and I? Of course you don’t. You haven’t the brains to work that out.

You call me racist for saying just as you've said.
You old fool.

When I’m in France I’ll enjoy the company of French people.

Severin,

Always the joker!

And of course you’re a woman

Keith, I won't do you the discourtesy of returning your insults, but I think you should take your own advice:

<< You’ll never be taken seriously while you continue to exhibit blind pig-headedness. >>

Also, you could look up the meaning of the words 'stereotype' and 'tolerance' in the dictionary. You don't seem to know what they mean.

Bon voyage, and Salaam Paris :)

"Wrong you are judging me according to your interpretation of what I said. And I pointed out to you that your interpretation was wrong and asked you for an apology. Of course you’ve shown you’ve been too proud to acknowledge your error."

I just responded to what you wrote. Others have viewed your comments in the same way. This is what you said:

"I'll spell it out for you. Nazeem is Muslim Australian who does't share entirely our viewpoint on civil liberties for woman yet he dares to lecture us on what he sees as our racist society."

"I notice you didn't include Indian people or Muslim people in your groups of people who have or are enriching both their own and our collective lives by joining in with the rest of us in this place.
Was that deliberate or does it reflect a current unfortunate reality?
....Let's hear Nazeems attitude to civil rights of women in Australia ... please."

How were we meant to interpret that? The way its written it suggests that Indians and Muslims dont contribute to Australia. (Untrue and Racist) It also suggests that Nazeem holds sexist views because he is a Muslim. (Untrue).

"Mate if you doubt my integrity say so"

I more or less did.

"You’ll never be taken seriously while you continue to exhibit blind pig-headedness."

Good point. Were you standing in front of a mirror when you wrote that? Either way, I can't take youu seriously anymore.

Keith, you stated:

<<<< Severin,

Always the joker!

And of course you’re a woman >>>>

Not sure what point you are trying to make here, the only inference being that you have issues with women as well as Muslims?

Well well you three have never debated my comments, you've all run back and forth to the name-calling factory and continually sought support from each other, like bullies and cowards always do.

Now when faced with the ultimate stupidity of seeing one of your cohort, CJ, actually saying things that mirror my views, the same things you abuse me over, do you either reproach him for his inconsistancy or accept my viewpoint as perfectly valid and non-racist?
Does CJ face with honesty his own comments?

Oh no! You insane fools ignore the realities and just keep up the inane abuse. Really that is indicative of a weakness of thought and character.

You blokes are intellectual midgets ... and have amused my mates and I utterly for days now. I hope you keep it up... but I don't think you can best the fun that was had when I read CJ's comments about Islam ... as posted above.

Know the dif between libel and slander yet Davad?

keith - in the kindest possible way, you evidently don't understand what I wrote in that discussion. I think I expressed myself quite clearly in that thread, but once again you seem to have difficulty with our language.

It's perfectly possible to tolerate Islam and Muslims, while simultaneously disagreeing with the imposition of religious law on a secular society. However, it is intolerant to ascribe antisocial patriarchal attitudes to an individual on the basis that he is Muslim, especially when his own words indicate otherwise - as Severin points out.

Speaking of whom, Severin is a woman, not a "bloke". You're not very good with people, are you keith? I'm glad for your sake that you have at least some "mates", even if they're apparently reduced to hovering around your PC for entertainment while you type silly, if hateful, inanities.

It takes all kinds, I guess - but that's what tolerance is all about. That is, of course, why we tolerate you :)

'... we tolerate you :)'

If you think tolerance is abusing people, when you perceive them as holding views with which you do not agree ... then you've really outdone yourself.

You're made yourself into a true laughingstock and even bigger ass than you've already displayed.

Another word for keith to look up in the dictionary: 'abuse'.

The only abuse in this thread is coming from him - everybody else is communicating calmly and politely.

I hope his French is better than his English.

I completely agree with you CJ.

It would have been bad enough if Keith had said those things about Nazeem because he believed them. But to do it for his own amusement is deplorable.

Tolerance,

a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differfrom one's own; freedom from bigotry.
2.a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.
3.interest in and concern for ideas, opinions, practices, etc., foreign to one's own; a liberal, undogmatic viewpoint.

Now apply this to your so called tolerance CJ.

Laughable

Once again we hear intolerance from 'suck it up' Lucy.

Keith

May I suggest you do something on this thread that is completely different from your current modus operandi?

Read Nazeem Hussain's article in full.
Consider what he has written.
Make some thoughtful comments.

Thank you

Keith,
I admire you persistence in fighting off the uneducated. If you came here to OLO looking for a debate based on logic and facts you have come to the wrong place. OLO is dominated mainly by the leftist uneducated masses as you can see.
Good Luck,

PS don't worry too much about Bogan Lucy, she is your typical leftist Law graduate.

Hmm why the obsession with Lucy?

At any rate I don't think Keith has put up a logical or factual argument at any point. I'm beginning to think he didn't even read Nazeem's article. Those comments on 'tolerance' are very applicable indeed.

From the viewpoint of someone reading from The Land of Harry Connick Jr., some of the comments I've seen here are truly frightening.

The Hey Hey situation seemed like an aberration until afterward I started reading some of the comments people posted on web-based stories about it. The defensive (and often hateful) attitudes shown in the online comments shone a much brighter light on the ACTUAL problem than anything which appeared on television.

If anything some of the comments on this piece are even worse. The "logic" in some of these posts, such as it is, seems to be along the lines that racism "doesn't exist in Australia" because "its a white country and people who aren't white have to adapt". And that worrying about racism is just "liberal claptrap", rather than a legitimate issue which should cross all political, ethnic, gender and economic levels.

Of course (as is bound to be raised in attack against me) what do I know? I come from the most racist country in the world--the United States of America. I say that only half in sarcasm, since in a sense it is completely true. The only real advantage we have over Australia is that we realize this about ourselves. Because of that we can, in fact, sometimes be TOO sensitive about the situation. But I don't think I am in this case, reading what I'm reading here. Frankly, I'm horrified.

I have relatives who live in Australia, who are very orthodox Jews (the kind who walk around with the appropriate head-gear all the time) and they've sometimes alluded to the difficulties they have--the subtle digs, the "haw haw" slap on the back attitudes, etc. I've always kind of dismissed their stories, because Australia for the most part seems like such a shining example in most things. But the Hey, Hey thing, and the online follow-ups, have shaken those assumptions. Nobody wants to talk about it. Or if they do, its all angry denial and deflection.

Please proceed with all the inevitable anti-American venom and spleen venting. Yes, its none of my business.

ozzie: << Keith, I admire you persistence in fighting off the uneducated. >>

I'd be very surprised indeed if the keiths and ozzies of OLO are better educated than those of us who point out their bigotry. I've got a couple of degrees and postgrad qualifications - perhaps ozzie could share with us the extent of his/her educational attainment?

I agree with David Jennings about the obsession with Lucy too. It's both obnoxious and a bit creepy.

CJ I think the admins have actually gone and deleted some of Ozzie's posts. They might have blocked him as well, I'm not sure.

It might have just been easier to report Keith's comments as being potentially defamatory rather than to engage him in what has been a long and ultimately fruitless discussion!

Ozzie these blokes are all very well educated. Sadly though their learning has been confinred to the 'square'. ie all uni graduates.

And really they just 'hunt in a group' and persecute anyone who disagrees with them... because they know they are right. I've watched them for yonks and just keep pulling their 'chains' when statements they make and pontificate over are just to erroneous to ignore.

Their tactic is the tactic of the simple-minded conformist. And they fail to understand people like me have never had the need to avail from others any sort of support in confronting their stupidity.

You'll note how these blokes all know each other quite well and how their simple mud-slinging never really reflects actual facts or clearly stated opinions... often they just lie... and I think they think that's intellectual.

Suffice to say I proudly finished my formal education in year 12. I matriculated twice but found the environment of Universities far too constricting to be of any use to me.

I've read widely ... and quite systematically. I've probably read more than did Adolph's fat pilot.

My fav author is Richard Saunders... for reasons most of these blokes would never appreciate. My most misunderstood hero, Diogenes... because of his intergrity in opposition to common convention. My most despised ... Adolph Hittler, Stalin and all other socialists.
Most loved Henry Lawsons poems, Shakespeares sonnets and Louisa Lawsons publications/journals, Nikolai Leskov ... earthiness and Gustave Flabert's ... understanding of women. I like Tolstoy's shorter works and get lost in Poe's intrigues.

Reading classical works was a condition my mother imposed when she helped me start and financed me in my first business at 17.

So I guess I'm an under-educated, redneck, former businessman and unmarried father who now is planning a world cruise ... solo.

David Jennings ...

Report me you smug fool!

The people who would judge would do so fairly and without the closed mind you exhibit. They'd also be dealing with you and all your mates as well.

I doubt any of you would welcome the exposure ... and I'd make sure it was pretty comprehensive and extensive.

It would start with ... this display of your tolerance

'Keith's comment is actually very indicative of the intellectual poverty of the racists. Kaith doesn't want to answer for racist white Australians - fair enough. But then he suggests that Nazeem should share his views on women etc. Why? So that Nazeem can reflect the "Muslim" viewpoint? Keith also suggests that Indians and Muslims don't enrich Australian society. Really?? A lot of them hold down good jobs, pay their taxes and obey the law. Thats fine by me. Keith also fails to mention the number of Indians who apologised to Andrew Symonds when he was in India. You have to tell the whole truth in a debate.'

followed by

CJ's classic tolerance...

' Keith's comment is the typically disingenuous racist dross we've come to expect from him. He doesn't want to answer for racist 'white' Australians because he's one of them.'

And boy you'll both have some talking to do to explain away your attitude to CJ and CJ's previous posts remarks which mirrored my position.

So go ahead ... make my day.

ps ask 'suck it up' if she'd particularly like to be included? Do it off-line of course.

I think that they are entitled to take issue with some of the things you've said here. Particularly that you said some things that could be regarded as pretty offensive and then later you suggested that you were baiting people.

Lucy,

You are dead right ... and I'd welcome them to take issue with my opinions.

But

they don't ... they merely are critical of me personally in their comments.

In the past I've often given CJ the opportunity to correct his habit of making personal attacks ... whenever we've differed. Now I don't bother. It's standard for him in any thread he enters. Sadly it is a very poor example for impressionable youngsters.

Please do take note that I have only ever responded to invective with invective.

I've tried the reasonable approach, as I did with David Jennings on this occassion, but it makes absolutely no difference. Nor does presenting logical and supported evidence in any sort of dispute with these types. They just keep on their original tack, no matter how much evidence or argument is presented. Often they'll lie or change the meanings of words and statements to support their debunked criticisms.

I taunt, not bait, them with their failings. You are right though. I shouldn't taunt them ... but it is really funny ... from where I sit ... so for both of us and as it is a poor example to others ... I'll stop.

I do however, as you will come to see, reward respect with respect ... just as I fling personal abuse in reaction to flung personal abuse. I'm consistant ... but often I do offer compliments without provocation. I guess I'm usually just reactionary and as much as I want to bite my tongue, I simply cannot ignore much of the stupidity, that passes for intelligence, that I encounter in my life nowadays.

I've stood up against the stupidity of dogma all my life and at 57 I don't think I'm going to stop ... unless I happen to find some sort of rustic uncomplicated pit stop in todays insane race towards sameness and security.

Both are impossible aims.

Solo ocean nights and the canals of France hold increasing allure.

beuna suerte mujer joven

Keith

Bon voyage!

Why thank you Severin. That was noble.

And since it is normal for those who are remaining behind to wish well upon those of us going I can only wish you could join me in my truely noble endeavour.

I sincerely hope that you can in the future overcome any impediments that may prevent you from doing as I.

buenas noches

Goodbye Edward Smith

David,

It takes a special kind of nastiness to suggest death and disaster be visited upon another simply because they hold views opposite to your own.

Is it really too difficult for you to rise above such arrant nonsense and pettiness?

Keith