"The mythology of the struggling European settlers, in far-exile from their natal home, laying the foundations for the Australia we know today, is commonly invoked by monoculturalist political figures such as Ms Hanson, former Prime Minister John Howard, and retired Liberal “bridesmaid” Peter Costello..."

Again, another biased interpretation and distortion of what Liberals Howard and Costello were about.

Some like to think they know about what the Australian nationalist mindset is about, preferring to describe some as being as mono-culturalist, but I do not think they have a clue about what such people really think. Even so-called right-wingers, such as Keith Windschuttle, are much more visionary about issues such as race and culture than the biased left would have us believe. In fact, I do not believe that Howard or Windschuttle have the slightest trace of racism or monoculture in their body, despite their willingness to express concerns about such issues.

Oh well, while the Howard government did reflect some views held by the majority of Australians (who must be remembered also come from a variety of backgrounds), and a part of one of the more tolerant nations of the world, let the idealists have their say as they preach their supposed wise view to the minority that also believe that some (Howard and Costello) are mono-culturalists.

Chris,

such superficial reasoning does you no favours.

Howard, by his demonstrable adherence to Conservatism indeed marks him as a monoculturalist by definition. His very allegiance to the Queen
as more than a current political reality marks him as one who believes in elitism by birth and a English person(not Aussie) at that, implies he ranks race. True his brand of racism is not as pronounced as Hansen that can be attributed to a better education, different conditioning and simple more intellectual prowess.

His dogged refusal to acknowledge the sensitivities of other non white Australian. His political willingness to play the or allow the race card to be played regarding the Tampa etc marks him as either lacking any moral conviction or a tacit racist.
The list goes on.

Chris, I would agree that he isn't a member of the KKK but to say he hasn't a racist bone in his body is simply not credible.

Australia does have an under current of implicit (low level) racism, as do all nations. I posit there is a relationship between circumstances and racism.
Because other are does that mean we shouldn't strive to overcome our more animalistic tendencies?
PS re Pauline, who do I send the sympathy card to the British Government or the Crown.?

Is the hat going around to help pay Pauline Hanson's one way fare :)

I wonder is she is going to be able to cope with the Indigenous peoples of England, and the immigrant population. England has had had more than 500 years of people living there of African decent - making them true blue British.

This is the first time I have laughed out of enjoyment about anything Pauline Hanson has said.

I hope she mixes well with England's other immigrants, and that her rellies welcome their colonial relative into their family. I really hope she makes a good go of it, so she likes it and stays over there.

Re Howard and co being racist, if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck then it probably is a duck. His actions, and the actions of his colleagues, look racist, sound racist, so probably are racist.

Don't get your hopes up, people.

It is just a stunt dreamt up by a real estate agent to help sell her property.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/pauline-hanson-not-moving-to-britain/story-0-1225831306634

Smart.

We're the dumb ones, for continually providing her with the oxygen of publicity.

Oh b*gger. It was too good to be true.

Still, the thought of it makes me smile.

examinator, you said of me "such superficial reasoning does you no favours".

Define what racism is and tell me and how Howard may be one.

and please go a bit deeper than merely citing his refusal to apologise on behalf of the Commonwealth for the stolen children

The author is a thorough going multiculturalist, supported by the multicultural industry, the Islam Industry (the Islamic Council of Victoria) as well as the immigration department, a government arm doing the government’s bidding.

The introduction of multiculturalism as government policy in Australia was not a democratic one; it was the totalitarian decision of politicians who never consulted the electorate. It was suddenly announced, one morning on radio news, during the Fraser regime.

The entire culture of Australia was changed in a totally un-democratic way.

Pauline Hanson was an aberration in Australia politics, and most of us will not miss her at all. But, she had a lot to be angry about, as did many Australians who, while not particularly liking her or her style, agreed with – and still agree with – many of her thoughts on the downhill run of their country after multiculturalism was declared, by a handful of politicians, to be official in Australia.

The fact that the Australian people allowed a government to get away with such an undemocratic outrage proved beyond doubt that the average Australian is a complacent dead-head who deserves what he or she gets. Unfortunately, those of us who take things seriously have to put up with what the dead-heads deserve, too.

Thinking people knew that the multicultural move would bring disaster and something should have been done about it. But, the dead-heads just whinge about it after the act – the foulest known in Australia - and still continue voting for the same idiots they always did.

Hanson did not have “…strident anti-immigration views.” She was against the immigration of certain types of people. Many of us feel that she was wrong to preach discrimination in immigration – her particular beef was against Asians who have proven to be very good immigrants – but she had every right to believe and say what she said, just as everyone else should have had the right to a say on multiculturalism.
......

......

Until people grasp the difference between non-discriminatory immigration (the only right and decent system when we need migrants) and the undemocratic, enforced-by-a-few-without-consultation policy of official multiculturalism, the longer arguments driven by pointless articles like this one will go on.

There is a huge difference between a multi-racial society and a multicultural one. This author is the umpteenth one to ‘advise’ us about ‘Afghan camel-drivers’ – even if many scholars say that they came from Northern India! She doesn’t seem to know about the Chinese, who far outnumbered the Afghans whom every man and his dog mentions when they are trying to convince us that Australia has ‘always been a multicultural country’, even though a few camel-drivers hardly set the scene for such a mythical country.

I would be interested to know where the author came by the knowledge to claim that:

“The earliest ships brought prisoners and settlers from many different ethnic and religious backgrounds …”

Passengers on the earliest ships were convicts of Anglo/Irish background. It’s true that there were a few non-whites who ended up on Norfolk Island, but most people brought to Australia prior to free settlement could not be described by any means as being of “…many different ethnic and religious backgrounds.” When the free settlers did come, they were generally European, with some Germans fleeing religious persecution, but they were still Christians.

And, the author’s sneering at people she likes to call “monoculturalist” – Hanson, Howard and Costello – merely shows her ignorance because what she calls their ‘myth’ was pure fact. Aborigines were Stone Age hunters and gatherers, who made no contribution to modernity.

As for Hanson, she is clearly not bright enough to know that the UK has been totally ruined by multiculturalism, and by the time she wakes up and comes back here, Australia will be just as bad unless people start demanding that multiculturalism be removed, root and branch.

I do believe that Pauline was, for the most part, purposely misunderstood & misquoted by the Latte Set. Like the Emperors new clothes others jumped on the band wagon, not wanting to be seen as crass underclass. Her two sidekicks sabotaged her every move. Maybe they were paid to do so by the big two. Now we can't have an upstart muscleing in on their party. Can we? Strangely all she wanted was a fair & equal go for everybody with no special favours for anybody. Was that so bad? I do notice that the big two have changed their policies to reflect what she was calling for. Strange action for Parties that put her down. Maybe they were forced to reflect the will of the common man.
So she is going to the mother Country. Well, she is in for a big shock. There are extremes of everything there. One winter & she'll be back. At the height of her career I went on a holiday. Every where I went I asked about Pauline. Nobody had heard of her. The British Isles, France, Singapore, Malaysia. So much for ruining Australias reputation.

I wonder if Pauline really knows what living in England is like. It often seems greener on the other side of the fence. I will not be at all surprised if the UK doesn't come up to her expectations as most of the things that she complains about here, exist in greater quantities over there. A large amount of money could always insulate her of course, either in the location she chooses or an ability to cocoon herself, but I doubt she has enough to do that.

Dear Chris
Don't waste your time engaging in dialogue with Examinator. Anybody who comes up with "I posit there is a relationship between circumstances and racism.
Because other are does that mean we shouldn't strive to overcome our more animalistic tendencies?" is beyond help.

Leigh,
Always great to read your posts. You are one of the few people on OLO with intelligence and honesty.
Thanks.

Also have to agree that the author cannot be trusted to give a fair and unbiased opinion. She has funding by the multicultural lobby and is paid to spread her filthy propaganda.

Perhaps Rachel should not use the Womans Day as her source, because it was announced today that Pauline Hanson is going nowhere at all, except for a vacation. However, those of you who watched Four Corners on Monday night would have seen the families who really are getting out of this country and heading for the UK or almost any other country they can access: the families with disabled kids. Rachel must be dreaming if she thinks this country is tolerant, pluralistic or accepting of difference. If it's the land of opportunity for only some, then it's not the land of opportunity at all. In the disability sector, we are just coming out of the cave.

It is clear that the author is simply trying to push her own agenda by throwing rocks at Pauline. Her ignotance is shown by her statement that Pauline was anti-immigration. Pauline was against high immigration and advocated zero net immigration, which was reasonable given the high unemployment at the time. There are many that share that view today.

Muliculturalism has divided us into tribes and the politicians have now recognised this and have dropped the use of the MC term, in favour of integration. So again Pauline was right to oppose multiculturalism, the ideology is flawed. There is much conflict between various ethnic groups.

To cite the 'Womans Day' as an accurate source of information is laughable as that mag does not have credible reputation. It certainly is not the first time Pauline has been quoted incorrectly or out of context. But i guess that sells mags.

ozzie,

Thankyou for your kind remarks.

"Her ignotance is shown by her statement that Pauline was anti-immigration. Pauline was against high immigration and advocated zero net immigration, which was reasonable given the high unemployment at the time. There are many that share that view today."

Firstly, its "ignorance." Secondly, can't you see the clear contradiction between the first and second sentences there? Hanson was against immigration. The unemployment rate in 1996 was about 8% and it was falling. The figure itself needs to be looked at as a fair component of it was made up by people without skills or by people who were long term unemployed. We now need more younger workers to support the ageing population.

Dear Lucy
If you are going to chide contributors for their spelling mistakes make sure you check your own spelling first. For example; ""Firstly, its "ignorance."" Should be "it's ignorance."
When Ms Hanson was elected to the House of Representatives it was as the member for Oxley. In 1996 the unemployment rate for her electorate was 11.6 percent, above the national rate of 9.2 percent.
As a populist, she reflected the views of her electorate and many others outside her electorate, demonstrated by the formation of and early support for the One Nation Party.
Her opposition to Asian migration largely stemmed from her opposition to multi-culturalism but as an economic "protectionist" she also opposed immigration because of its believed negative impact on domestic employment.
I suspect today she still maintains her view on Asian immigration but I am not too sure about her view on immigration as a whole. I think she would realize the need for positive immigration to support a mature economy; as long as immigrants were not Asian or came from Africa or the Middle East!

Mate if you think that a racist immigration policy would be valid then well .....

Dear Lucy
Do you read the replies posted in the Forum or are your comprehension skills on par with with your spelling?
Only you and perhaps Examinator could interpret my comments as evidence of my thinking a "racist immigration policy would be valid".
Please explain.

blairbar: << I think she would realize the need for positive immigration to support a mature economy; as long as immigrants were not Asian or came from Africa or the Middle East! >>

blairbar, while you may not think a racist immigration policy would be valid, your speculation above certainly suggests that you think dear old Pauline would support one.

As it happens, in this case I agree with you.

Then there is the vitriolic resentment that Pauline might get a few bucks for her senate votes, and the obvious enjoyment for some from her being wrongly jailed.

Pauline's Australian vision made little sense to me and her contribution to popular debate was more damaging than progressive, but the thought of government by people happy to see someone wrongly jailed because of a difference of opinion is not enticing either.

Fester; her contribution to popular debate was more damaging than progressive,

Please explain!

If you mean that she represented the view of the common people & not the Latte Set, maybe you're right. No one knew who she was overseas. A point that seems to get ignored. So any debate was purely within Australia. As for progressive. Hasve you noticed that the two partys that put her down have adopted most of her policies. Strange that.

So Lucy makes a comment and she gets vitriolic abuse in response. It shows how intolerant certain people are on Online Opinion. Its always the same people on these forums having the same debates which usually devolves at some point.

But Blair, you might not be a racist, but if you look at what you wrote it could be read as an endorsement of Hanson. Thats just how it reads. So its not fair to jump on Lucy for taking issue with that.

Ozzie ... wow ... what offended you more? The fact that Lucy made a valid point about the contradiction or the fact that it was her that made it?

Lucy,

You do realise that you are calling for a Ponzi scheme. Those large numbers of young people that you want us to bring in (or grow ourselves) to look after the old people are not immune from aging and cannot be deported when they have outlived their value to the economy. What happens when they also need pensions and health care? When does the population growth stop?

Pauline Hanson was uneducated and said a number of things that were silly or prejudiced, but no more so than some other politicians, such as Ross Lightfoot or Graeme Campbell, the former Labor MP and founder of the Australia First party. She was attacked essentially because of her opposition to the globalisation (and mass migration) agenda as pushed by elites in the Anglosphere countries. A lot of the hysteria about her was because globalisation isn't all wonderful for ordinary people in developed countries and she gave people an avenue for protest. See this graph from the US for example.

http://lanekenworthy.net/2008/03/09/the-best-inequality-graph/

and this graph showing the share of national income going to the top 1% in several countries since 1900. Note for the US that there was essentially zero net immigration from 1924 to 1965.

http://clubtroppo.com.au/2006/08/24/policy-and-perhaps-culture-matter-for-income-distribution/

She was jailed with a massively disproportionate 3 year sentence on a technicality of election law that she didn't even try to cover up. I was surprised at the time that Amnesty International never took up her case as a political prisoner, as they did with Albert Langer earlier. It would hardly be surprising if she did want to leave Australia.

Jayb

For starters, I think that the massive amount of immigration of the past decade is in part thanks to Pauline. Politics should be about what is best for the country and its people, not division and hatred. She took away the focus on the legitimate reasons for fewer immigrants, most notably the large infrastructure cost. The massive amount of government debt is a very real legacy of the mass immigration odyssey. People calling for greater immigration need to be challenged about the infrastructure costs for all the extra people. The first response to critics is the redneck racist allegation. Yes, it is an illogical response, but an effective on thanks to Pauline.

"you might not be a racist, but if you look at what you wrote it could be read as an endorsement of Hanson"
David, I might be a racist, whatever that term means, but how what I wrote could be interpreted as endorsing Ms Hanson's views escapes me. Even my sparring partner CJ could see I was presenting what I think Ms Hanson's views on immigration would be today. And CJ can spot a "racist" ten miles away.

But thats the whole point. CJ knows you. He's seen your posts before. I don't know you from a bar of soap so I just read it the way it was written. My apologies if you took offence.

Ozzie at the risk of feeding the troll - do you know that bogan is sometimes used as a racist term for white working class people? I'm not ashamed of being either. At least I grew up to be a lawyer. What exactly is it that you do again? apart from trolling?

Dear Lucy
I was not offended by your remarks just surprised that from reading my comments a lawyer could think that somehow I supported the views of Ms Hanson.
"bogan is sometimes used as a racist term for white working class people"
Since you use the adjective frequently, perhaps you could enlighten me and other contributors by defining precisely what you mean by "racist". And show how the word "bogan", "bevan" in Qld, has racist overtones.

Lucy; At least I grew up to be a lawyer.

WOW! Admitting that you are a Lawyer. That takes guts. Given their woeful reputation.

Divergence; She was jailed with a massively disproportionate 3 year sentence on a technicality of election law that she didn't even try to cover up.

Yep. A Lawyer caused it. The Lawyer got away with it & the scapegoat went to jail for it. All predetermined by Lawyers.

Blairbar; "bogan is sometimes used as a racist term for white working class people"

Wouldn't just calling someone a Bogan be racist act?

Blairbar; I was presenting what I think Ms Hanson's views on immigration would be today.

Hanson wasn't against immigration, just Boat people or illegal immigrants.

Fester; Politics should be about what is best for the country and its people, not division and hatred. She took away the focus on the legitimate reasons for fewer immigrants, most notably the large infrastructure cost.

No the media did that with the backing of the big two Political Parties. It looked like some real competition so they had to do something to eliminate that at any cost.

You know, it's not hard to tell that the posters here got their information via the media. Did any of you actually look & read her policies? My bet. No.

Bogan Lucy wrote

"Ozzie at the risk of feeding the troll - do you know that bogan is sometimes used as a racist term for white working class people? I'm not ashamed of being either. At least I grew up to be a lawyer. What exactly is it that you do again? apart from trolling?"

No I never knew bogan was a racist term. I always thought it was a term used for uneducated, poorly behaved people like yourself. Please enlighten me as to exactly how the term is racist. I notice you often jump in and accuse many OLO users of racist remarks. Seems everthing to you is racist.

So you are a big time lawyer, wow. This may impress other OLO users but not me. Let me inform a few of the OLO readers. In the 80s and 90s in NSW, Law was one of the easiest degrees to gain entry to ( I'm not sure of what goes on today). It had one of the lowest entry marks, provided the applicant was more than 20 years old (to many Uni's this was classified as mature age). I had friends who were hairdressers and full time surfies going back to do law degrees. Nearly every Tom, Dick and Bogan has a Law degree. And nearly every University was developing their own Law degrees. Not only was it a super easy degree to get into but it was also an easy faculty for Uni's to set up and make money from. Very few infrastructure resources were required ( ie no labs, computer facilities, hospitals, etc) just class rooms, tutors, and books. The Uni's expanded and quickly pumped out thousands more lawyers, capable of doing very litte good for society other the arguing.

What I think was just fascinating from that rant was that you still haven't told me what you do for a living. Are you unemployed? Do you have such a huge issue with me because I'm a woman and I disagree with you?

You didn't make any sense in the last thread and you don't make any sense now. But I did notice at the time that several other people criticised you but you didn't really go after them. You went after me. The difference? They all had male sounding user names.

I still stand by my interpretation of Blair's statement as a valid possible interpretation, if ultimately incorrect, of what he had written. Read together with his dismissal of the Examinator, who was taking issue with Chris over a "race" (!!) issue, the sentence in the relevant post could be read that way. I think its interesting that even though I apologised, you are still making an issue about it. (Cad).

Now when I did law at UNSW in the 1990's the tertiary entrance rank for school leavers was well into the 90's. From memory the cut-off was 98.7 and I scored 99.2. I hope that doesn't make you feel small or inadequate.

I came from a poor background. But I've worked hard and I'm doing quite well in a firm.

As for your friends who are doing law, I know that some law schools let anybody in as graduate entry or as mature age students (over 21). But I got in as a school leaver to a top law school.

As for the term bogan. When was the last time that it was ever used against anybody other than white working class people. Some of my family members are bogans. I'm not ashamed of them. It might not be racist per se (there's that word again) but the Facebook group "So sick of flag waving bogans" etc changed its name after some of the users pointed out the potentially racist usage (?!) of the word bogan. Why don't you log onto Facebook and check it out.

Jayb
"You know, it's not hard to tell that the posters here got their information via the media. Did any of you actually look & read her policies? My bet. No."
"Hanson wasn't against immigration, just Boat people or illegal immigrants"
"I and most Australians want our immigration policy radically reviewed and that of multiculturalism abolished. I believe we are in danger of being swamped by Asians. Between 1984 and 1995, 40 % of all migrants coming into this country were of Asian origin. They have their own culture and religion, form ghettos and do not assimilate.”
Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in Federal Parliament
Tuesday, 10th September 1996.
Lucy
"As for the term bogan. When was the last time that it was ever used against anybody other than white working class people."
I guess the reason for that is that bogans are a sub-group of white working class people with a love of Jim Beam, heavy metal music, black Tshirts , flannies and V8s.

Blairbar
Yes, her maiden speech was very inarticulate. We all know that. One of the things she was criticized for, being too ordinary Australian. Her actual policies on immigration & other things were more specific. It's a pity she mentioned a particular group. Now, of course, it would be Muslims or Middle Easterns.

Since then there have been a number of reviews of our immigration policies moving towards Paulines view by both big parties. I'm not in favour of multiculturism either. I don't know anyone who is except for a few Latte set types. My heritage is Anglo/Scott/Irish/Swede & Danish. I don't get around in a kilt, speaking gailic & playing the bagpipes every day, all day. Once a year on Paddys day & Hogmarnay maybe. Do they assimilate? No.Do they form gettos? Yes. My take on that is that, she was right. Her sin, she said so. Not potically correct by Latte Set standards. Therein lies the problem. The Latte Set looks down on anyone who they consider isn't one of them. Racist?

Blairbar; that bogans are a sub-group of white working class people with a love of Jim Beam, heavy metal music, black Tshirts , flannies and V8s.

Yes, we all know that, but your sin. You said so. Politically incorrect by Latte Set standards. Therefore conceivably racist. The rest of us understand what you mean, without particular judgement.

Lucy; Do you have such a huge issue with me because I'm a woman and I disagree with you?

Oh oh! the feminist victim slip is showing. Are we all supposed to jump to your defence now?

Lucy; From memory the cut-off was 98.7 and I scored 99.2. I hope that doesn't make you feel small or inadequate. I came from a poor background. But I've worked hard and I'm doing quite well in a firm.

Bogans can have brains too, just most don't use them. You did. Good for you. But your feelings of inadequacy do show.

I don't know that I agree with you JayB. Something about the severity of the attack that Ozzie launched on Lucy, and the fact that he's done it across threads, makes me a tad uncomfortable.

We're now way off topic anyway. I enjoyed the article. Thought she made some valid points.

David Jennins; We're now way off topic anyway. I enjoyed the article.

No we're still on topic. See below.

Original article; Pauline Hanson, the former One Nation leader who polarised Australians with her strident anti-immigration views.

A blatent assumption. She was not against immigration. See her policies, not her maiden speech. She was against illegal immigration. There is a difference, which seems to get purposly ignored.

Original article; My own research deals, in part, with how Muslim Australians conceive of their attachment and connection to Australia. I am especially interested in the views of the approximately 40 per cent of Muslims who by birth are as Australian as Pauline Hanson. In a survey of 600 religious Muslims conducted as part of my doctoral research, I found that the majority of participants indicated they placed a high level of importance in preserving their Australian identity, and nearly 80 per cent of Australian-born individuals who provided textual responses to the request “tell us your thoughts on being Muslim and Australian” provided responses that can be specifically described, either wholly or in part, as affirming their connection to Australia and Australian identity.

I just bet she didn't ask the questions of her "Australian Muslims" research. Do you want Australia to adopt Sharia Law. The answer would be "YES". Do you want Australia to become Muslim. Answer "Yes definatley". Research can be manipulated to show what you want it to show.

If I went to the 20 houses in my street and did a survey. One Question. Should illegal immigrants be sent immediatly back to where they came from. I would get 20 Yes answers. So my research shows that everybody in Australia agrees that they should be sent home. Ahhh! research. Wonderful stuff.

The original article doesn't mention Sharia law at all. It doesn't say anything about Muslims wanting Australia to become a Muslim nation. So thats a bit of a stretch.

Ozzie you still haven't told me about your high-flying job??

"Original article; Pauline Hanson, the former One Nation leader who polarised Australians with her strident anti-immigration views.
A blatent assumption. She was not against immigration. See her policies, not her maiden speech. She was against illegal immigration. There is a difference, which seems to get purposly ignored."
Jayb Ms Hanson had plenty of proposals but she was never likely to be in a position to implement any of them. She had views on a wide range of subjects, including Asian immigration. For some reason you don't consider her maiden speech as representing her views. Perhaps this might change your mind.
"A new book by a former advisor to Pauline Hanson, "The Pauline Hanson Story: By The Man Who Knows," by John Pasquarelli, says that Hanson's 1996 speech opposing increased Asian immigration, which briefly made her second only to the prime minister in citations in the media, was a product of chance. However, once Hanson realized that the public favored less Asian immigration, she made it the centerpiece of her proposals." Migration News March 1998 Volume 5 Number 4

I'm almost disappointed that post from you Ozzie was lacking the full intensity of your usual impotent rage. It came up short so to speak.

If you actually read my posts on OLO I've never actually called anybody a racist. I might have said that a posting was racist or that a viewpoint was offensive but I have never directly called somebody a racist. Though, I'm pretty sure I've referred to you in unflattering terms. Even then I don't resort to vulgar abuse.

Let's take a quick look at your last offering. You said:

"I argue with you because you are a low life scum uneducated bogan who seems to enjoy critizing others and labelling them without any proof."

Well uneducated is a tad harsh. I don't agree with the last part either your posts usually provide ample proof. So that was a bit premature.

I'm going to take a wild guess here, but when you say that you are a "medical practitioner", and lets just imagine that I believe you, is that just a fancy way of saying "male nurse"? Does that explain the issues that you seem to have with me? Given that this is the third or so thread where you've gone after me? Gosh, what would happen if my username was "Mother"?

My profession is management. I am accredited to an advanced level from a prestigious and leading Australian tertiary institution in this field.

The posts on this article, as its author accurately indicates, is demonstrative of a toxic and insidious racist culture permeating this country, that leads increasing international perception, of Australia as a racist pariah state.

I may not be considered demographically isolated to the Latte set, my parentage of Maori and Scottish background. Of my Maori heritage, the indigenous culture of NZ, a country which has achieved a recognised treaty with its indigenous people, indicates those achieved principles obvious as leaving the posts on this article, in the dark ages.

I doubt those responsible for these posts, if they were to visit, would stay long in NZ, that its indigenous people may perceive them as a source of food at the lower end of the food chain. For I further doubt any of those responsible for these posts, capable of comprehending the concept of doctoral research, that such rigour requires the capacity for original thought.

It is further obvious, the siege mentalities demonstrated in these posts, reveal the fear inherent of racism.

Hanson was jailed in Qld for rorting the electoral funding process, that may be observed consistent with the opportunist, self indulgent and gratuitous, 'carpetbagging' profile of racists.

At an official citizenship conference last year, before the citizenship test was reformed, I queried the Australian Citizenship representatives that; I have asked some 20 Australian anglo/caucasians the name of the first Australian Prime Minister, as questioned within the citizenship test, and none could respond with the correct answer. Did that mean I was hanging out with the wrong crowd?

From a management perspective it appears the same posters attempt to flog their irrational, myopic, moronic, and profane bigotry, constantly on this site as pseudo intellectual comment. That articles on race issues are observed to draw them like flies, realises you fool noone. The most appropriate and constructive comment I may offer in response therefore, is simply, 'get a life.'

Agree with much of that. I think that the racists have more time on their hands and have a zealot like conviction that their view and only theirs ois correct. Anybody who trie to engage with that will have a meltdown lije Luci's last post. Cheer up

Where have you all been, especially Rachell ?
Pauline Hanson said publically that she was not leaving Australia.
She was going to New Zealand first and then to the UK for a holiday.
She also said that when she returns that she will probably move down south somewhere.
She said she had no interest in living anywhere else.

You like many others have been the victims of media manipulation.
Even the BBC has an item a few days ago that Pauline Hanson was moving
to the UK.

It is a very serious problem that the media can make up a story and
then pass it off all round the world.
What interests me is with how many other stories are we misled ?

Ngarmada is your first language Maori or Gaelic? It sure ain't English.
How can anyone make sense out of this paragraph?
"I doubt those responsible for these posts, if they were to visit, would stay long in NZ, that its indigenous people may perceive them as a source of food at the lower end of the food chain. For I further doubt any of those responsible for these posts, capable of comprehending the concept of doctoral research, that such rigour requires the capacity for original thought.

Blairbar you really are a nasty piece of work. As a dysfunctional parasite you are quite pretentious.

As a doyen of English Grammar you are an obvious impostor, you contribute nothing, but obviously convince yourself your devious cunning is actually related to intelligent thought.

As a desperate racist parasite, you really need professional therapy, most probably that of an institutional nature, although I perceive such accommodation may not be a new experience for you.

Well I didn't understand the paragraph above either, though I got the gist, but I definitely understood the last paragraph!!

I'll admit I'm a bit curious too about the educational background and careers of some of the people who post here. But at any rate let's cool things down?

Lucy the wrote
“What I think was just fascinating from that rant was that you still haven't told me what you do for a living. Are you unemployed? “
Wrong again, do you ever read the posts you are complaining about. Just last week I told you I was a Medical Practitioner. You do have such a conveniently short memory.
Lucy wrote
“Do you have such a huge issue with me because I'm a woman and I disagree with you?”
First of all you tried to label me a racist because I called you a Bogan. I asked you to tell me exactly how the term “bogan” is racist and you basically admitted you were wrong.
You wrote
“It might not be racist per se”
So now you try to accuse me of being sexist, because I choose to argue with you instead of the other male sounding users on OLO. Is that the best you can do? I argue with you because you clearly lack intelligence and are poorly uneducated, yet you seem to enjoy critizing others and labelling them without any proof. You regularly call people’s views racist just because you don’t agree with their views. Have a good look at you posts. Seems any uneducated person who doesn’t like another’s point of view just tries to label them racist or now sexist and walks away.
Lucy wrote
“Now when I did law at UNSW in the 1990's the tertiary entrance rank for school leavers was well into the 90's. From memory the cut-off was 98.7 and I scored 99.2. I hope that doesn't make you feel small or inadequate. “
Well no, why would it make me feel inadequate? Around half of the lawyers do Law because they are simply too dumb to be doctors. One of my best friends who completed the HSC in the early 90s wanted to be a doctor went to UNSW law school ( I know at the time UNSW was considered by many to be the best in the country).

Continued...

She got close to first place in 1st year and then transferred to medicine, but not before telling the Law faculty exactly where to stick their useless degree. She also told me once that it was the biggest joke of a degree, she stated and I quote “I wouldn’t wipe my arse with a law degree”. I can still remember that 17 years later. I too did a degree at UNSW in the early 90s and some of those friends I mentioned previously went to UNSW Law. At the time UNSW and Macq law schools were two of the easiest degrees to get into in NSW. For those over 21yrs (20 for Macq) UNSW Law simple doubled your best 5 (best 4 for Macq) units (usually students have to count all 10), thus people that would not have been eligible for an Arts degrees could easily gain entry to UNSW Law. A great many students in your course couldn’t even have gained entry to an Arts degree.
Does this make you feel “small or inadequate”
Lucy wrote

“I came from a poor background. But I've worked hard and I'm doing quite well in a firm”
Come on now, you couldn’t have worked that hard in the 2 years it takes to do a Law degree (please don’t count the other 3 years for the Arts, Science or Commerce component)
Lucy wrote

“As for your friends who are doing law, I know that some law schools let anybody in as graduate entry or as mature age students (over 21). But I got in as a school leaver to a top law school.”
Lucy that’s quiet misleading. Somebody reading these two sentences could be led to believe that your Law school did not let in people under the above quoted scheme. However being a UNSW graduate myself, I happen to know that it was ONLY UNSW Law and Macq Law that allowed students in under these schemes. So the cut-off entry marks you quoted really in no way were a reflection of the standard of entry required.

So you are a nurse? Its a noble profession.

I seem to have really got under your skin. But I agree with what CJ and David wrote in another post, this is getting a bit creepy.

I'm clearly in a different category than your friends and I'm clearly on a different intellectual level to yourself. Plus I'm more rational.

You seem to have a huge issue with women, lawyers, people who don't agree with you, people of other races (I saw your posts on Indian crime). Again not calling you racist just saying that you seem to have an issue, perhaps even a complex. But then I'm not a trained medical professional. Perhaps you could ask your friend or even ...your Mummy.

See you in 24 hours.

ozzie, I'm still unclear - was your degree from UNSW a medical degree, i.e. are you a medical doctor? You seem to be a bit coy about it, while irrelevantly slagging off at lawyers.

As it happens, my daughter did a Law degree at Sydney Uni about a decade ago. She worked hard to get there and while she was there, and did very well. It took her 4 years full time, and she's certainly not dumb. I find your comments about law students both ignorant and obnoxious.

Now be honest, are you really a medical doctor? Please don't say yes, because that would be really worrying.

Blairbar you really are a nasty piece of work: a quite pretentious, dysfunctional parasite and an obvious impostor masquerading as a doyen of English Grammar.
You contribute nothing; yet have convinced yourself that your devious cunning is evidence of intelligent thought.
A desperate racist parasite, you need professional therapy; most probably that of an institutional nature. I believe institutional accommodation may not be a new experience for you. It is certainly not for me as I have been in an institution for many years.
I have been encouraged to post ludicrous comments to sites such as ON LINE opinion as part of my therapy. My therapist said it didn’t matter if most readers couldn’t understand my comments as the very act of writing helps in my recovery. It is working, albeit slowly, and I no longer believe I am Napoleon. Must go now, I have to invade Russia.
.

Thank you for your last post Blairbar, I rest my case. Owing to a capacity for only a fourth grade education, anyone correcting others grammar are playing russian roulette with a full chamber. But there's hope Blairbar, to reiterate my previous conclusion, you only need get a life. Try contributing something original to this site for example.

Dennis, thank you for your conciliatory comment, however I would remind you that racists are observed, demonstrating callous disregard for others, and malevolent, venal, and pernicious, intent. It drives such relentless dysfunction, it is a clear and present danger, and menace to the community. In common with other dysfunction, racism holds the potential to retain, and/or mutate into, a myriad of other aberrant behaviours.

You do not build bridges to killers, you treat their malaise, and defend your loved ones from it where necessary. Vilification and street bashings of vulnerable members of our community, are not the subject merely for civilised debate. For the latter would be an entirely imperialist, colonial view

"..I would remind you that racists are observed, demonstrating callous disregard for others, and malevolent, venal, and pernicious, intent. It drives such relentless dysfunction, it is a clear and present danger, and menace to the community. In common with other dysfunction, racism holds the potential to retain, and/or mutate into, a myriad of other aberrant behaviours"
Sorry my fourth grade education can't help me to decipher this paragraph. Can anybody out there please help? What about you Dennis?
"Owing to a capacity for only a fourth grade education, anyone correcting others grammar are playing russian roulette with a full chamber"
Anyone who has only the capacity for achieving a fourth grade education is playing Russian roulette with a full chamber when correcting another person's grammar.

Now you're getting the hang of it Blairbar, I perceived the author of this article was attempting to convey exactly what you demonstrate in your posts. That is, monocultural, myopic, attitudes and mindset, the defining characteristics of bigots.

For its obvious that its not english grammar, and your perverse mindset, morons alike you are attempting to foist upon others, but in fact, english literature. You are so dysfunctional a moron, you cannot understand anyone else unless they hold your twisted perception.

The majority of reasonable people in the world comprehend this, and know exactly how to deal with you. So give up Blairbar, accept the truth of your identification as a comprehensive loser, as anyone on this site will now observe from this point. You are revealed, it was not hard.

"For its obvious that its not english grammar, and your perverse mindset, morons alike you are attempting to foist upon others, but in fact, english literature. You are so dysfunctional a moron, you cannot understand anyone else unless they hold your twisted perception"
Cripes I am now a dysfunctional, moronic bigot, with a perverse mindset and a twisted perception, trying to foist upon others English literature. Ah well, things can only improve.
But don't be concerned Ngarmada, I still alike you very much.

For a immigrant from some backward, dysfunctional Third World country, Australia surely is a land of opportunity. Australia offers them levels of wealth, security, freedom, education and comfort far beyond anything they could have ever hoped for back in their old countries. And, in return, Australia demands practically nothing. We give out our citizenship without demanding immigrants renounce their previous loyalties and citizenship. We not only allow, but actively encourage, newly-arrived immigrants to retain their old cultures and ethnic allegiances. We even provide them with taxpayer funds to establish their foreign enclaves on Australian soil. No wonder Third World immigrants are positive about Australia!

But what about the existing Australian population? What do they get out of mass immigration and multiculturalism?

Yes, immigration makes the immigrants themselves very happy. And yes, it makes big business very rich (immigration = cheaper labour and more consumers). But why would the citizenry, the ordinary Australians who are being disenfranchised and displaced, why would any of us favour immigration?

The author of this jejune article doesn't even bother to ask that question. In the mind of a career multiculturalist, if you belong to the Anglo-Celtic majority and are opposed to mass immigration or state-imposed multiculturalism, then by default you are a Hansonite, a xenophobe and a racist.

[Continued below...]

If Australia has seemingly become a land of opportunity for immigrant minorities, but not for members of the majority such as Pauline Hanson, I would argue that it probably has a lot to do with multiculturalism, particularly the way it has promoted the rights of new minorities at the expense of the old majority.

To quote Greg Clancy in “The Conspiracies of Multiculturalism”:

"Multiculturalism has divided the Australian population into two social groups – those who are predominantly of Christian descent and of generally Anglo-Saxon or Celtic ethnicity, and the multicultural group. Those belonging to the multicultural group have had a “special” status developed for them by multiculturalism. This status has accompanied the privilege of possessing cultural differences which, irrespective of their social suitability, are to be protected within the multicultural system."

Finally, as for the "myth" of monocultural Australia, it is worth reminding the likes of Rachel Woodlock and others that in 1949, Australia's population was 98 percent European, 90 percent Anglo-Celtic. Even as late as 1988, Australia was still over 90 percent European, 75 percent Anglo-Celtic. Compared to other settler societies, Australia was a relatively homogeneous country, racially and culturally. Yes, there were non-European minorities here, but their numbers were so small, and their contribution so inconsequential, that they were completely absent from mainstream Australian life.

Relentless are these insidious racists who persist in proliferating their maniacal racist views on academic comment such as in this article, in attempt to influence their perverse opinions qualifying their inherent right to rule the world, or at least Australia.

Alike Efranke, Blairbar, Andrew Bolt, and Piers Akerman, they hold no hesitation in attempting deception in misrepresentation of factual information, they determine that follows as justified, by their perceived unassailable sovereign right to decide exactly how and what all should think. For example, the comment of Efranke that by 1988 Australia was still 90% european, and 75% anglo celtic. It demonstrates the perversity of their dysfunction.

As is known of the record and history of such extreme malevolence for the purpose of vested interest, effectively they seek the sbservient submission of those they deem, by deception, they should be entitled to rule. And the reason they take the course of stealth to pursue that twisted aim, is their instinctive knowledge it is illegitimate, malevolent and perverse.

As the majority of all populations are aware, they are sick and require help. However their malady realises them, according to their destructive proclivities, a dangerous threat to all. That is, dangerous as the threat of a psychotic [for such malady is definitively psychosis], for if they were to retain the least shred of character and integrity, and challenge those they wish to submit to their slavery, they would be dispatched in very short order, and is why they attack by stealth.

Ngarmada, I was just wondering, judging by the style of your writing & expression, if you haven't been studying Mao's "Little Red Book"?

Ah yes, Jayb, I was wondering when you would turn up, with such certainty, its prediction is analogous of a maggot drawn to a corpse.

No, I hold no communist leanings, for when alike me Jayb, you are tained to the level I am in the science of management, you may transcend such flawed ideologies as communism, socialism, and capitalism. Then you may be able to utilise language terms as definitive forms of expression, although with malevolent, moronic, parasites, like you, I would not be confident.

For racists by definition, are by nature so dumb their intellect resembles single cell organisms, to the extent that if they were miraculously endowed with a second brain, it would be tragically lonely.

They are usually criminals, consistent with their mindset and psychosis, where their malignant desires feed their anxiety from their absence of self esteem. That obsession may be inflated on sites like these, that such sites allow them the delusion of intellectual parity, reinforcing their delusion of superiority, while coincidentally allowing them to peddle the malice of their malaise.

It is why they are drawn collectively as parasites to articles such as this, and the characteristic indicators that identifies them comprehensively

Why thank you for your generous compliments Ngarmada. I'm sorry I didnt mean to convey that you were a Communist/Socalist/Capitalist.

It was the flowery manner of expression & the mode of rhetoric espoused North Korea's Kim jong Il's News reader the other night on TV, that made me think of you. ;-)

In purely White Anglo/Saxon/Celtic/Australian vernacular. I just bet your students take the piss out of you.

Welcome Jayb to the world of "malevolent, moronic, parasites”. However don't get too upset as you share company with such luminaries as “Efranke, Andrew Bolt,(and) Piers Akerman” and me.
But Jayb there are no students to “take the piss out of (Ngarmada)”, only fellow inmates. So sad.

It is disheartening to observe the affirmation of you both that consistently defines the profile attributed to your dysfunction.

For I retain no students, Jayb, I am not a lecturer, although it is another perfect example of how your 'loony tunes' mentality misinterprets information, and irrationally misrepresents reality. Your concluding vernacular confirms your status.

Of an even more severe form of the malady, Blairbar is clearly of the sycophantic variety of parasite. Obvious as retaining no capacity to process thought even irrationally, he simply repeats anything he sees, you only need to view his last 3-4 posts.

To assist you understand sycophantic, I am advised that in prison comprehension [the culture Blairbar consistently refers to by the intimidatory context of his posts], Blairbar would have powerfully influential associates in the facility, who would demonstrate considerable affection to him, but significantly as 'tough love.'

Could we all be aware that English is the only officially accepted language on this website.

Ossie I'm so glad you finally recognised the language of the website, you must be so pleased with your achievement.

Ngamarda: << For racists by definition, are by nature so dumb their intellect resembles single cell organisms, to the extent that if they were miraculously endowed with a second brain, it would be tragically lonely. >>

I disagree. While many, if not most, racists are spectacularly unintelligent, there are many otherwise intelligent and reasonable people who are accurately described as racist and/or xenophobic. We get all kinds here, but even at OLO not all of them are complete dummies.

Indeed, many of them are seemingly unaware of their racism - or are in denial about it - and get quite defensive and/or offended when it's pointed out to them. That doesn't mean it's not worth doing, but I find they get the message more readily if I use relatively simple language.

"To assist you understand sycophantic, I am advised that in prison comprehension [the culture Blairbar consistently refers to by the intimidatory context of his posts], Blairbar would have powerfully influential associates in the facility, who would demonstrate considerable affection to him, but significantly as 'tough love.'
Well Ngarmada as you have spent time in prison I will have to take your word (or should that read English literature) about what it is like behind bars. By the way what were you charged with? Wilful destruction of the English language? Assault and battery with a paragraph? Unlawful possession of a dictionary?

Ngarmada wrote

"I am accredited to an advanced level from a prestigious and leading Australian tertiary institution in this field."

Could it be the UNSW Law school?

You still haven't told us your qualifications Ozzie or what actually it is that you do for a living. Lucy thinks you are a nurse. I doubt that. My guess is that you sell medical insurance. You seem to have the level of compassion that corresponds with a private health insurance company.

I'm very curious. Its the great unanswered question of OLO.

CJ Morgan, to reiterate my comment in previous posts on this article; "you do not build bridges to killers." Dealing with thugs on their level is an exceedingly paternalistic and stupid strategy. Paternalism is part of their malaise.

Ozzie, your moniker is obviously taken from the racist Australian chant oi! Adopted from the racist and criminal skinhead movement in Britain, it is appropriate to your intellectual capacity, and intent. You may recall, a few years ago an insightful and acclaimed British investigative documentary demonstrated how the real agenda of that movement was covertly monopolised by a mere handful of criminals attempting to organise a criminal arm for their own personal benefit.

The documentary further demonstrated how easy it was to infiltrate them, following the adage, it is effective to con a con with a con.
Such is the limited ability of illegitimate intent to identify irrational thought.

This failure of ability is similar to your feeble attempts to identify the tertiary institution I was trained, however, it is my responsibility to advise you, your finding me is a truly unwise idea. As I would be similarly disappointed to find it necessary to find you.

That you are obviously au fait with criminality and its prison culture, I would advise you to reflect upon its remarkably consistent failure.

David wrote
"You still haven't told us your qualifications Ozzie or what actually it is that you do for a living"

There is a little button on your computer just to the right with an arrow pointing upwards (or away from you). Try pressing that a few times and you will see that I have in fact already given you the answer to both questions. I shouldn't have to repeat myself multiple times.

Ngarmada wrote
"This failure of ability is similar to your feeble attempts to identify the tertiary institution I was trained, however, it is my responsibility to advise you, your finding me is a truly unwise idea. As I would be similarly disappointed to find it necessary to find you."

and
"They are usually criminals, consistent with their mindset and psychosis, where their malignant desires feed their anxiety from their absence of self esteem. That obsession may be inflated on sites like these, that such sites allow them the delusion of intellectual parity, reinforcing their delusion of superiority, while coincidentally allowing them to peddle the malice of their malaise.

It is why they are drawn collectively as parasites to articles such as this, and the characteristic indicators that identifies them comprehensively"

I believe there is a new Windows program available which includes free spellcheck, grammar check, sentence construction check etc. I suggest you most expeditiously avail yourself of such, that is get one quickly and use it.

No you haven't ever answered the question. You've told us that you went to UNSW (so much for quality control) but not what you studied there and not what you actually do.

In fact you are very evasive on this point. You've made a claim about being a "medical practitioner" but that is a very broad field covering doctors, nurses, radiographers and even general hospital workers. We still don't have a straight answer.

I should also add Ozzie that you and Ngarmada do make rather a lovely pair. You should put on a public debate together it would draw quite a crowd.

I note the comments you make regarding grammar, style etc and I have often thought that they were equally applicable to your postings. I am slightly concerned by the tone of some of the recent posts, and I would call for restraint, but I guess that would again be ignored.

David wrote

"You've made a claim about being a "medical practitioner" but that is a very broad field covering doctors, nurses, radiographers and even general hospital workers."

Please give me a reference to support this claim.

The term Medical Practitioner refers to those individuals with medical degrees. They may work in a wide range of areas (Plastic Surgeons, General Practitioners, Cardiologists etc), but the one thing that they all have in common is a medical degree, which makes them Medical Practitioners. The term most definitely does not include nurse, radiographers and general hospital workers. David, your comments demonstrate you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.

I will await your reference.

So you're not going to answer the question then?

For those observing these comments on this article, it is obvious to note, these collective racists who post their malevolent comment in support of their perverse views, attempt to influence others essentially by intimidation.

Therefore they are strident in their attempt to con you into believing their purporting of support for the integrity and applied rigour of english grammar, when realistically, as other more reasoned posters may be observed to indicate, these racists more likely retain the literacy levels of a young child, and the IQ levels of bug larvae.

It is why they are obviously so familiar with reference material for grammar. It demonstrates their intention is not an interest in the integrity of grammar, but the colonial mindset of the past.

For Australians the question that is obviously raised then, is whether such mindset is appropriate and relevant as central to 21st Century Australian consideration and its progress.

The obvious answer defeats any legitimate purpose then, to the rantings of these dysfunctional individuals, and their postings on articles such as this. Therefore we must be aware to not be deceived by their witless cunning.

For we must question whether upsetting people for no good reason, as exemplified in the middle east conflict, to an extent that determines peoples unity with extremists such as Saddam, and those that implemented the Lockerbie, 9/11 and Bali, incidents, although it may be a 'capital idea,' is really worth it.

The mentality of these racists then is observed definitively feudal, they care nothing for original thought, for they are capable of none. They demand rigorous compliance with their interpretaion of grammatic principles, by so doing attempting to further intimidate others to accept and promote their views. Its not a new tactic, its basic thuggery, and further indicates their repressive and criminal intent, and dysfunctional character.

ozzie, nearly a week ago I asked this question of you on this thread:

<< Now be honest, are you really a medical doctor? >>

You still seem to be dancing around the question, without quite answering it directly.

Could you please provide a direct answer - a simple yes or no will do. No references required.

As exemplified of the banality of the latter post of CJ Morgan, it is my responsibility to spell out the alert to those naïve who post on these issues, of the insidious nature of the racists I refer to, and their criminal intent in attempting to identify your personal details by pseudo interrogative argument. For it has no relevance to critical analysis, but is an attempt to identify the individual, and their personal details, of those who post on these issues.

It is a tactic in the malicious armoury of such mercenary behaviour, that by implication these parasitic predators may realise the achievement of their intimidation, once the individual targeted becomes aware of the potential of that intent. Failing that outcome, the potential remains to advance that veiled threat to the individual identified, if their identity details are effectively revealed.

Usually those targeted, alike Lucy and I, have committed the unforgivable transgression of assertively or articulately disagreeing with their twisted views and contentions.

To defend yourself from such invasion of privacy, merely lay a trap for them, it is not difficult, they are morons.

To those apologists who pretend the voice of reason in such attempted invasion by these animals, I despise you as the cowards you are, devoid of character. Demonstrated by your callous disregard of the venal nature of these bigoted, racist, predators I refer to, it is from the callous disregard of your neo colonial arrogance they proliferate, and from denial of your own closet bigotry they are spawned

Ngarmada
"Usually those targeted, alike Lucy and I, have committed the unforgivable transgression of assertively or articulately disagreeing with their twisted views and contentions."
The Free Dictionary
"ar·tic·u·late (är-tky-lt)
adj.
4. Characterized by the use of clear, expressive language: an articulate essay."

Ngarmada, I have no interest whatsoever in identifying ozzie, but I would like clarification of his earlier claim to be a "medical practitioner". This is because I find it very hard to believe that any medical doctor in Australia would espouse the blatantly racist views that ozzie does on this forum.

If you have a look at my posting history, you might notice that I have consistently argued against the racists, xenophobes and Islamophobes of OLO for years. You may also notice that I use clear, unambiguous language with which to do so.

You seem to have your heart in the right place, but you do the cause of social justice no favours by your deployment of abusive, almost incomprehensible language that makes you look as bad as any bigot.

CJ; I have consistently argued against the racists, xenophobes and Islamophobes of OLO for years.

Oh! CJ, you old hippy you. One of the beautiful flower people. Still living high on Love/Sex/Drugs. The swirling coloured lights are wonderful, arn't they, but watch out for when the spiders come out.

CJ, not liking some aspect of someones particular behaviour doesn't make one racist/xenophobic/Islamophobic. It just means that you don't like that particular person or their particular behaviour. I suppose you love those grubs who live in filth & wreck their rented accomodation as much as indigenous,Gay & Islamic terrorist. Ahh, the power of the flower... All we need is love, love , love.

XOXOXOXXX

My point precisely CJ, is your obsession with the look and not the substance. You are obviously someone whom has never experienced racist vilification, but believe, alike these parasites, you retain a sovereign right to pontificate upon, and decide, such issues.

Many observers, alike you, without personal experience of these issues, view these posts reasonably, attributing credibility to both divides of the debate where they observe it. Unless these parasites are engaged to reveal their true agenda, the tactic and design of their deception is accepted by many as legitimate debate, its the modus operandi of these parasites. I trust you are getting an education, its not rocket science, even for pseudo liberal morons.

For example, Jayb reveals himself once again with his apparent intimate knowledge of drug abuse.

Ngarmada wrote

" As exemplified of the banality of the latter post of CJ Morgan, it is my responsibility to spell out the alert to those naïve who post on these issues, of the insidious nature of the racists I refer to, and their criminal intent in attempting to identify your personal details by pseudo interrogative argument. For it has no relevance to critical analysis, but is an attempt to identify the individual, and their personal details, of those who post on these issues."

I agree with your thoughts exactly. I too was getting concerned with CJs constant hounding for more personal information. It's really worrying and getting creepy. I have told these people my degrees and what I do for a living but they persist with their demands. It seems that CJ and her friend David want to focus on the man and not the ball. The points should be debated, not who is making those points. If CJ occasionally makes a good point (usually by luck) then CJ should be acknowledged even if CJ is poorly educated. That really doesn't matter. But the constant demand for more personal information, especially on a public website is creepy. I also think that CJ's comments about you especially this one

CJ wrote
" You seem to have your heart in the right place, but you do the cause of social justice no favours by your deployment of abusive, almost incomprehensible language that makes you look as bad as any bigot."

are insulting. Don't worry about CJ, comments like this simply demonstrate the true person CJ is.

Oh! Ngarmada, just what are we going to do with you. Do you have some sort of inferiorty or supperiorty complex? I don't care either way.

I don't know which of the 4 basic races you belong to & personally, I don't careor want to know. Just because I believe that you have shown yourself to be a complete & utter d!c%he@d, & have voiced my opinion as to such, that doesn't mean I dislike your race as a whole, It just means you in particular.

I dont think it right to judge one's fitness as a human being by a few opinions expressed on an internet forum. Have a look at what happens when morality gets linked to action. Was "Raving Roland" convinced of his own morality and the immorality of the people he tried? If so, did such a view make him feel morally justified to treat these people inhumanely?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKOCmBXrVY8&feature=related

The current appreciation of morality is measured by one's humanity to others, not a crusade to weed out those seen as morally inferior.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1084711/posts

It is indeed curious how pro racist parasites congregate one by one on these issues. It may be a miscreant feature and driving force of their slumber parties, with such creative names as ‘ozzie,’ and ‘fester.’

For it is not CJ that retains our priority ozzie, but the clear and present danger of those common to racist malaise.

I should add CJ, if one intends to entrap these predators, it is vital that first you contact the police, for any of criminal intent realise it imperative they avoid detection. You may also require to be articulate with that approach, as the power and authority conferred upon law enforcement agencies, according to record, are a natural attraction to those of bigoted proclivities.

As to your comment of the absence of medical professionals retaining such proclivities, I wish that it were real, unfortunately not. For many retain still, a paternalistic cultural view to their professional practice as an elite ‘mission.’ It is the application of the practice and ethics of professional management, and its associated leadership quality, that reveal such flaw.

As to the professional accreditation of those alike ozzie, from his posts who could possibly observe that potential as anything other than delusion. I observe the gender of yourself and Lucy has been identified. There is a possibility consistent with other proclivities these individuals demonstrate, they may be potential stalkers, enraptured of your professional abilities, and incomes, that may handsomely accommodate and conceal criminal drug activities for example. For potentially, realising such hypothesis, may salve the anxiety of their lack of self esteem

For Pete's sake Ngarmada take your medication or at least see your doctor about altering it. Your prose is actually getting worse.
"There is a possibility consistent with other proclivities these individuals demonstrate, they may be potential stalkers, enraptured of your professional abilities, and incomes, that may handsomely accommodate and conceal criminal drug activities for example. For potentially, realising such hypothesis, may salve the anxiety of their lack of self esteem"

I am still waiting on David to explain how the term Medical practitioner includes nurses, radiographers and general hospital workers. I find it beyond belief that a supposedly educated person can hold such a belief.

This thread's just getting more bizarre and incomprehensible.

Jayb seems to think that arguing against racism indicates that I'm a "hippy". How on earth does that follow? Then there's this, whatever it means:

<< I suppose you love those grubs who live in filth & wreck their rented accomodation as much as indigenous,Gay & Islamic terrorist. >>

Followed a bit later by this:

<< I don't know which of the 4 basic races you belong to... >>

Definitely no bigotry or racism there, folks.

Ngarmada wades in with more tortured prose, asserting (as far as I can decipher) that one has to have experienced racial vilification in order to be entitled to comment on racist bigotry. I really can't work out what s/he is otherwise trying to say, beyond hurling abuse.

Unsurprisingly, ozzie avoids the simple question we've been asking him yet again. I'll have to conclude that he's been telling fibs about his being a "medical practitioner".

Just to clarify things for you - I'm a former academic anthropologist who has studied these matters for decades, both in the field and in the literature. I'm probably at least as well educated and qualified as anybody in this thread to discuss intelligently such phenomena as racism, xenophobia and Islamophobia. And for ozzie's benefit, I'm a bloke.

Once again I'm in agreement with blairbar, at least with respect to Ngarmada's mangled expression.

Ngarmada you can take my comments in this post on board or just disregard them. But when I read your posts what literally jumps out at me from the computer screen is the level of anger and bitterness that you have generally and on the question of race. It is true that racist comments are infuriating. But as CJ has very correctly pointed out quite a few of the ‘racists’ are actually unaware that they are saying things that are racist. They react with horror and shock when it is pointed out to them because they were not aware that they were doing something wrong.

More importantly, its not always right to refer to somebody as a racist. A person might say things from time to time that are racist. But that does not mean that they are inherently racist or that they will always be that way. To simply pigeon-hole people is to give up on advocacy and persuasion.

There are some people who are blatantly racist in their remarks. I note that Ozzie almost always trolls with racist comments. But he seems to have “issues”. Look at the way he went after Lucy. Look at how evasive he is about being a “medical practitioner.” None of us really care. This is an internet discussion room. We could walk past each other in real life and never know it. For all we know Ozzie is a high school kid and CJ could be a High Court judge. It’s the internet, its kind of hard to know who you are speaking to – so I wouldn’t get carried away with any one person.

But at any rate you need to be less angry. I kind of agree with some of the sentiments you express but not the anger and vehemence or some of the more extreme statements. Put everything into perspective. This is a website, anybody can post here, there is no quality control on what they say and their opinions aren’t going to change the world. Life is good - be happy!

"Practitioner: One who practices something, especially an occupation, profession, or technique.
Medical: Of or relating to the study or practice of medicine"

That is broad enough to cover a few occupations relating to medicine. I note also that Ozzie used lower case letters for "Medical Practitioner" not the upper case that he/she used in one post.

The Free Online dictionary gives this definition of a "medical practitioner:

"Noun 1. medical practitioner - someone who practices medicine
medical man
dental practitioner, dentist, tooth doctor - a person qualified to practice dentistry
doc, doctor, physician, Dr., MD, medico - a licensed medical practitioner; "I felt so bad I went to see my doctor"
caregiver, health care provider, health professional, PCP, primary care provider - a person who helps in identifying or preventing or treating illness or disability
inoculator, vaccinator - a medical practitioner who inoculates people against diseases
medical officer, medic - a medical practitioner in the armed forces"

And so the great question of our time remains unanswered...

CJ it looked like, to me at least, that you loved everybody & everything. Gay, Indigenious, Muslims, as in the "Summer of Love" 1967. I just thought it sounded like that you would, naturally, include the house wrecking grubs, pedo's, terrorists, etc. Or are you prejucist against those people & not the afore mentioned. Would not make you "racist" or at least "a preduced person"?

As an antropologist you well know that it is accepted that there are 4 basic races & numerous sub races. The Australian Aboriginal is, for example; Cacausian, Sub:Australoid or Austroneasian depending on the particular book & which particular migration date is being discussed. So what's your problem.

I believe, as DJ explained & I tried as well, which seemed to be purposely ignored, that not every thing,just because it's not all airyfairy, Love & light, is a racist remark or intended to be. There seems to be the, "I'm holier than thou", "no you not I'm holier than you" competition with some of these radical non-racist extremists.

And, fa f^(% sake, let's just ignore Ngarmada. She is just too weird & I tired of playing with her.

Jayb: << CJ it looked like, to me at least, that you loved everybody & everything. >>

That's one thing you got completely wrong. While I'm not a hater like many who post on these threads, I'm pretty selective about who and what I love. Those that I do love aren't selected on the basis of ethnicity or religion. I certainly don't love any paedophiles or terrorists that I know of, and I have no idea what you mean by "house wrecking grubs". Termites, perhaps?

<< ... it is accepted that there are 4 basic races & numerous sub races >>

Certainly not by the great majority of reputable anthropologists, since about the 1950s or so. More recently, the notion of 'race' as a biologically meaningful category of humans has been completely debunked by the discovery that there is much more genetic variation within the so-called 'races' than there is between them. Do you know the difference between phenotype and genotype?

That's the second major thing you got wrong in that comment.

"Race" does persist as a social construct adhered to by racists, and sometimes by those objectified by them - but mainstream anthropology ditched the concept decades ago. Indeed, one sure way of identifying a contemporary racist - including those who aren't conscious of their racism - is that they talk about people in terms of "races".

David wrote,

""Practitioner: One who practices something, especially an occupation, profession, or technique.
Medical: Of or relating to the study or practice of medicine"

That is broad enough to cover a few occupations relating to medicine. I note also that Ozzie used lower case letters for "Medical Practitioner" not the upper case that he/she used in one post.

The Free Online dictionary gives this definition of a "medical practitioner:

"Noun 1. medical practitioner - someone who practices medicine
medical man
dental practitioner, dentist, tooth doctor - a person qualified to practice dentistry
doc, doctor, physician, Dr., MD, medico - a licensed medical practitioner............................................
medical officer, medic - a medical practitioner in the armed forces"

And so the great question of our time remains unanswered..."

which basically means that a Medical Practitioner is a person who practices Medicine, and in Australia, as in any advanced country, to practice Medicine you need to be registered with the appropriate Medical Board. So have a look at the Medical Practice Act 1992 Sect 4

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/mpa1992128/s4.html

Here it clearly states to be registered as a Medical Practitioner a person needs to have successfully completed a period of internship or training and also have a recognised medical qualification ( be a graduate of a Medical School).

If you want further clarification I suggest you phone one of the Medical Boards and ask them how many nurses, radiographers or general hospital workers they have registered with them.

Your attempt to justify your claim that

David wrote
"You've made a claim about being a "medical practitioner" but that is a very broad field covering doctors, nurses, radiographers and even general hospital workers. "

is simply ridiculous. It would have been more honest had you simply admitted your mistake.

Now for the record, and for about the third time,apart from other Uni degrees I have a Medical degree from an Australian Uni and work as a Medical Practitioner. For David, CJ and Lucy who usually require further clarification (ie too dumb to understand) that means I am a Medical Doctor.
Is there anything here you still don't understand?

I'm shattered CJ, by your comment of my "mangled expression." I agree with Jayb, you are a "prejucist, preduced, antropologist person," if only I knew what it meant.

A 'former academic anthropologist' explains everything. It sounds like an art degree from the 1970's. For what other credible science do you know that has "recently...completely debunked" one of its "meaningful" categories?

Did you study under the former Australian of the year, and author of The Future Eaters, which claims the Maori were eating themselves to starvation? For it must follow they were saved from malnutrition by colonial settlement. Still today I weep for that legacy that impacts upon the inherent physique of the Maori. Imagine the size and health they were in before being dwarfed by that malnutrition three centuries ago. No wonder Jayb comments; "She is just too weird and I tired of playing with her."

Blairbar is a one act performer, if he could not rely on pseudo grammaatic critique as central to his posts, he would have nothing to say.

As an "academic anthropologist" perhaps you could explain why these racist cohorts you and the other neo colonial posters tolerate, extract and virtually rewrite entire posts? Is it beause the barbarians may be coming and you must be ready to pull up the drawbridge of Fortress Australia?

Thanks for the eventual reply, ozzie. If you're not telling porkies, that's really quite scary.

Ngarmada, you're either having a lend or you're off your trolley. About the only thing I agree with Jayb about is that you're tiresome.

I also agree with David Jennings that you seem to be very angry about something to do with 'race', but it's very difficult to ascertain what exactly your problem is. Is English your second language? If so, may I suggest that you try using less complicated prose.

If not, may I suggest it anyway?

P.S. Tim Flannery's not an anthropologist.

I concur CJ, Tim Flannery is neither an anthropologist, nor a palaentologist, nor a climatologist, nor a credible anthropological author. If you can see where I am going with this, his comment retains approximately the same credibility as yours.

As grammatically inferior as my posts may be, I do not write f#@%, although you apparently have no difficulty tolerating it. Then you refer to my comment on one hand as "mangled," and then as "prose." That I am able to read and write 15th century english prose, perhaps indicates my apparent dysfunction.

My anger and frustration with academic liberals such as yourself and David, may result from that double standard of tolerance you both are observed to apply. For I understood a fundamental, and pillar, of scientific endeavour is the rigour of discipline applied for pursuit of truth.

However the ambiguity of tolerance observed of you both, suggests its potential extreme may tolerate such dysfunctional racists beating to a pulp, one of my culture, in an alley, for upsetting their perception of social equilibrium, by simply being different.

It would seem to me, if you retain an unrealistically flawed understanding of the subject you are talking about, you should simply not comment.

I'm not buying it. I think Ozzie is just pretending to be a doctor to get some credibility. His posts are too incoherent to be written by somebody with a university education. A tafe education maybe.

Ozzie, watching an episode of ER does not make you a doctor.

And attending UNSW Law school (the Law school with the lowest entry marks) does not make you a proper Lawyer.

And that just gives away the fact that you're not telling the truth.

UNSW is second only to USYD in cut-off marks for school leavers. UNSW is ahead of UTS, Macquarie and UWS in Sydney. Not to mention the other law schools in Australia.

The other thing that gives away the fact that you've never been to university was your contention that only UNSW and Macquarie took in a mixture of school leavers and non-school leavers. In fact, every law school in Australia does this and if you'd attended a university you would know this to be true.

Observation of posts by ozzie clearly demonstrate that if he retains tertiary accreditation, I should be Ghengis Khan.

To quote Albert Einstein;

“Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity, opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.”

Actually Ngarmada if you were Genghis Khan it would in fact clear up quite a few things.

But anyway, I am also a bit sceptical about Ozzie's claims. I agree with CJ that it would be scary if it were true. But thankfully I'll never know.

Ngarmada its not quite right to say that CJ and I tolerate the racists. Quite a few of the non-racists on OLO routinely challenge the racists. We're both academics so maybe that explains why we 'tolerate' a multiplicity of views. You also conflated some issues in one of your posts - we might tolerate diversity of opinion but we wouldn't tolerate violence. There are also legal limits on racist speech. But as I said earlier not everybody who says something racist is fully racist themselves. People say things based on their life experience and their opinions might change if they had a more varied and pleasant life experience.

The other key thing is proportionality. In a lot of your posts the aggression towards other posters is way out of proportion to what they said. You need to calm down and to provide a measured response to opinions that you do not agree with.

There is a grain of truth in a few things that you say. I think you might have seen through Ozzie more accurately than the rest of us have. But these things are getting outweighed by overly aggressive statements.

But if you're not doing this already, I'd suggest talking to somebody or counselling. You're clearly dealing with some serious issues and in my opinion OLO just isn't the place to deal with them.

Well thank you David once again for your voice of reason. I’m a little concerned though of your concepts of ‘tolerance and proportionality.’

For as they apply to balanced reasoning, I am bewildered how you are unable to discern remarks posted by the racists I identify, as anything less than expression of aggression synonomous of violent intent.

I would refer you to poignantly articulated maxims recorded of the former leadership of the African National Congress, prior to removal of apartheid. That regime that divided Australians during protests against invitation of its rugby union team, the Springboks, that ostensibly generated incentive within a captain of that team, to become instrumental as a political activist in the demise of the apartheid regime. [Hollywood movie about to hit your screens].

Two of those maxims I refer to, state [paraphrased];

‘The white man will do everything he can to help us, except get off our backs.’

‘You do not judge evil by degrees, someone stabbing you with only two inches of a six inch blade, is not doing you a favour.’

I suggest It is not I that needs counselling, but yourself David, for the duplicity of your argument is revealed

Just trying to help..

What is scary is the conclusions drawn about my morality because of my concern of the impact of a growing population on Australia. It is a bit like concluding that support for a growing population implies that one enjoys torturing animals and takes part in koala exterminations. this is the most upsetting aspect of the population debate for me. Not as bad as discussing abortion. At least I hope it isn't, and there might be some safety in numbers.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/australians-dont-want-more-people-poll-20100301-pdfe.html

I am unsure whether you are responding to the right thread Fester?

To your comment, I was not implying I was questioning your morality, I contend you retain no such moral fibre to contest. Your callous and cavalier consideration of others indicated to me in your posts, observes such assessment as evident. [I refer also to your post on the article: “What does it take to make a murder racist.”]

For the issue of this thread we are posting here, is not relevant to tree hugging or saving the whales, it is about your consideration of others who are simply different to you.

In further perspective, related to the thread on population growth to which you refer, posts on the article “Ponzi Scheme,” articulate the key global macro economic factors affecting future issues, that may be informative to you.

My posts on that thread indicate attitudes of ‘fortress Australia’ are not observed constructive, nor helpful, relevant to prospective outcomes “and therefore I sense young skywalker, the dark side of the force is within you.”

For many issues in the world today are undeniably interrelated, and their resolutions require balanced and focused perspective.

CJ Morgan: "More recently, the notion of 'race' as a biologically meaningful category of humans has been completely debunked by the discovery that there is much more genetic variation within the so-called 'races' than there is between them."

So what? There is more genetic variation within the sexes than there is between them, with sex differences between men and women being the result of just one genetic difference — one gene (the Testes Determining Factor) out of an estimated 50,000-100,000! Yet nobody is arguing that sex is not a biological reality.

Similarly, humans share over 98 percent of their genes with chimpanzees, and a very high amount with animals like mice and dogs. Yet there are clearly important biological differences between humans and other mammals.

Breeds of dogs are analogous to human races. Needless to say, breeds of dogs differ not only in appearance but in temperament and intelligence. Yet, the huge differences between the breeds are accounted for by tiny genetic differences barely detectable with modern analysis. As with human races, small genetic differences account for very important physical differences. In fact, a comparison of the most widely divergent human groups, such as Northwest Europeans and Australian Aborigines finds differences as great as those between chimpanzees and gorillas.

CJ Morgan: ""Race" does persist as a social construct adhered to by racists, and sometimes by those objectified by them but mainstream anthropology ditched the concept decades ago."

Uh-oh. If race doesn't exist someone should get on the horn pronto, and tell, for instance, the U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, which is in the midst of a campaign that specifically targets different "population groups" (the PC term for races) with their own unique treatment and prevention regimes.

Better yet, someone should really tell the Aborigines that there is no genetic basis for race and that their high incidence of diabetes is just a statistical fluke as is their low average life expectancy.

"Indeed, one sure way of identifying a contemporary racist - including those who aren't conscious of their racism - is that they talk about people in terms of "races"."

In that case, just about every single person on the planet must be a "racist" for nearly everybody self-identifies as a member of a particular racial group. In fact, it is only left-leaning Westerners who parrot obviously absurd notions about race not existing. Non-Western peoples have no problem talking about themselves or others in explicitly racial terms.

As for "mainstream anthropology", frankly who cares what a bunch of scientifically-illiterate Boasian hacks think?

Dear Efranke
My two children have a Torres Strait Islander mother and a Scottish/English/Irish/German father. What "race" do they belong to?

A prime indicator of racism is known of its inherent characteristic of fear. Alike a financial bottom line, the principles of its tracing are a straightforward exercise.

Of that characteristic, a prime indicator is its proclivity and need to define ‘us and them,’ as alternative to reasonably considering the perspective of factors shared in common. Its aberration may be analogous to the axiom; the optimist sees the doughnut, the pessimist sees the hole.

I am able to extrapolate this train of thought in my subsequent posts.

Of my latter comment, the key may be observed of ’sharing.’ For another characteristic of racism is its ‘carpetbag’ culture, synonomous of sacking and pillaging, which demands unassailable right to own everything.

I may be able to exemplify this with the current example of the search for the Neanderthal Gnome. The Neanderthal Code is currently in the process of identifying that Gnome, as a number of western scientists are now contesting the notion Neanderthals became extinct with the onset of modern humans. They are challenging the long held assumption of modern humans forcing their extinction, observing scientific evidence potentially identifying the ‘assimilation’ of the Neanderthal with modern humans.

According to reasonable consideration, we may observe this new theory as synonomous of further aberrant assumption, for why may the Neanderthal not have ‘integrated’ with modern man. Indeed they cohabitated in the same environment for enough millenia for that potential to be highly possible.

Although there is no current evidence for such postulation, noone has actually been looking for such evidence. Reasonably, it may be observed such potential is severely restricted when the evidence available to work with is fossilised skeletal remains.

However the anomaly between the immediate consideration of ‘assimilation’ as alternative to ‘integration’ is readily observed of the cultural mindset in play. For the current assumption suggests potentially the only interaction between modern humans and Neanderthals, was conflict or war, flying in the face of known attributes of human cohabitation.

Observation of evidence pertaining to cultures of the age of only a few millenia, demonstrate their development of the enlightenment to generally live together without killing each other.

I am able to appreciate the inherent general psychosis of western culture that potentially realised such inherent fear, with its recorded history of rampaging through europe sacking and pillaging each other. However, in the 21st Century, you would reasonably consider it time it got some therapy, and resisted that urge to wilfully inflict the symptoms of its malaise upon others.

I think you mean Neanderthal genome. A gnome is something you put in your front garden.

Erfanka, if you go back a couple of hundred years there weren't really any breeds of dogs. So much of the breeding of dogs for specific physical traits has resulted in so many of the genetic defects and health problems that we see in dogs today. So yes dogs and humans are comparable - but with humans nazi eugenics was discredited decades ago.

And btw a beagle can be just as friendly as a lab, collie, a cav spaniel, a yorkie etc and so on and so on. So all the hoopla about dogs having behavioural traits is bunk. Its what you train them to do that matters and how you socialise them. Even pit bulls can be docile if socialised properly.

Brerbare; My two children have a Torres Strait Islander mother and a Scottish/English/Irish/German father. What "race" do they belong to?

Apparently, according to CJ, The notion of Race is obsolete. But according to my book, "The Cambridge History of Southeast Asia Vol 1 & 2 parts 1 & 2 each" It would make your wife Proto-Australoid, your self Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic. Fairly much the same as everyone else in Australia of European descent, including me.

The Wikipedia has Race as;
The Current Concept as, Asian, Black & White.
The Major Historical Concept as, Capoid, Casasoid, Mongoloid, Negroid, Proto Australoid & Australoid.

The notion of Race can be based on many different things. Eg; Medical (Lactose intollerance, disease susceptability) & language, etc. I see now there is a therory that "Red Hair" is a trait left over from Homo Sapians interbreading with Neanderthals !? Does it realy matter?

Me, I don't care. People are just people & I treat them as I would want them to treat me.

So Jayb my children belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race?
And as my children both married members of the Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race, my grandchildren belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race?
Cripes Ngarmada has struck again.

It seems so, brer bear, it seems so. ;-)

Should we know the identity of the masked man Tonto? Waddya mean we white man?

Do you notice Jayb, there is never an iota of original or constructive contribution to debate by blairbar. All his posts have been stated previously, or are probably plagiarised from elsewhere. This is the comprehensive definition of a twit.

These are "constructive contribution(s) to debate"?
(1)"Of that characteristic, a prime indicator is its proclivity and need to define ‘us and them,’ as alternative to reasonably considering the perspective of factors shared in common. Its aberration may be analogous to the axiom; the optimist sees the doughnut, the pessimist sees the hole.
I am able to extrapolate this train of thought in my subsequent posts"
(2)"Should we know the identity of the masked man Tonto? Waddya mean we white man"
(3)" All his posts have been stated previously, or are probably plagiarised from elsewhere. This is the comprehensive definition of a twit."

Yes blairbar, you demonstrate you are the epitomy of a belligerent parasitic racist. The key to the apparent mystery of your intellectual stoicism is simple, there is no mystery, nor intellect, nor stoicism. You are a complete fake.

The deception of your attempts to promote yourself as an authority on english grammar is easily exposed, for I reiterate, you are never observed to contribute any constructive or meaningful addition to the debate. Every one of your posts merely carps over trivial issues, usually central to your interpretation of grammatic error.

It is readily observed therefore, you are obviously incapable of comprehending the meaning or context of the posts. You may be able to find in a dictionary, words used in posts, however you are unable to comprehend them when they are combined in the context of a passage. So you relentlessly copy others writing to feign the appearance of both understanding, and consistent contribution, to the site. Cunning, but inevitably stupid.

blairbar, ‘fess up, you’re basically illiterate aren‘t you? In your illiteracy, alike the majority of the criminal population, you covet racism as potential advantage toward cultivating support and patronage from the many in Australian mainstream society who share such toxic bigotry in common. You feign literacy and intellect as you are aware noone would take any notice of your attempts to peddle racist dogma as reason, if they realised your illiteracy, and your absence of experience in any legitimate field or endeavour.

Essentially, you prey upon those you consider at disadvantage, such as women, and ethnic minorities. blairbar, you are definitively observed a parasitic loser, with no redeeming attribute.

Cripes not only am I a "belligerent parasitic racist", "a complete fake", "basically illiterate", but I also "prey upon those (I) consider at disadvantage, such as women, and ethnic minorities" and I "have no redeeming attribute".
Surely someone out there can say something nice about me. I am starting to feel depressed.

Thank you for your confirmation blairbar. I rest my case.

Well Ngarmada, I think, by the tone of your posts, you have something against White people. Therefore I think you are a racist person. If not, then definately an "ist" of some discription.

Nice try Jayb, however, to any observer, the focus of my posts is unmistakable as squarely aimed at racist bigots alike yourself, and your cohorts. For the hallmarks and symptoms of your insidious dysfunction, alike any known disease, are patently understood in our society.

As attributes in common are known to be attractive to predators of opportunity, of opportunity such as prey perceived as vulnerable, or attraction to decaying matter of parasites, such perceived opportunity further draws the like minded. It is obviously why it is appealing to those of a criminal nature.

It is also why we may readily observe the same posters consistently appearing at articles of similar issues, attempting to peddle their same malevolent, dysfunctional, dogmatic, propaganda, as predictably as sunset.

Of other definitive features of their profile, most obvious is their identifiable predilection, common to pack feeders of carrion, for organised attack upon those they consider opposition or threats. This feature is often confluent with their proclivity for manipulation. For by further definition, their agenda is illegitimate, and therefore restricted in its capacity for initiative.

They may further be discerned from right wing conservatives who, if such individuals retain similar malice, demonstrate it of far less potential, as such lesser and diminutive potential realises their capacity and acumen to retain their dysfunction as covert, if indeed it is harboured.

As appealing as the perceived opportunity to infiltrate sites such as OLO by those racists who harbour such dysfunction may be, in order to manipulate its agenda, and deceive others, for professionals, exposing this stuff is child’s play. Its potential for success is a myth. Get some therapy Jayb.

Strike another plus for Multiculturalism and strength in Diversity. Tonight another murder by an Indian. Now 4 out of the last 5 Indians murdered in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack. Keep the Multicultural propaganda coming. I no longer believe a word of it. I wonder how the politically correct Multiculturalists will try to twist this story around. Surely it must somehow be the fault of a white Australian.

So by that logic if a white Australian commits an act of paedophilia on a white Australian child is it a race issue?

Why can't the death of an Indian child by an Indian man simply be a horrific crime. Why do YOU have to make it into a race issue. I don't think that anybody else has so far.

And why does an act of crime by one person of a racial minority on another person of a racial minority automatically invoke multiculturalism? It seems that you are conflating the issues in order to attack multiculturalism.

Given this concerning inability to rationally separate issues I really do worry for your patients

When a child has died in circumstances that are as awful as the way in which Gurshan Singh has died, what sort of person sees only a race issue? This case is as bad as the James Bulger case or the Dean Shillingsworth case.

More importantly, none of the mainstream media has made this a race issue. There hasn't been any comment by the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald or the Australian that endorsed a view that this was a race issue. So to suggest that the "media" was presenting this as a racist attack is false.

What type of person uses the death of a child to score cheap points in a debate on an internet forum?

boy! it sure was a long haul reading through all those opinions.

C.J.
Efranke gave you the commonsense obvious answer to your statement:-
"the notion of race as a biologically meaningful catergory of humans has been completely debunked by the discovery there is more genetic variation within the so called races than there is between them." He beat me to it. I suggest that the academic scientists that seek to put this up as a solution to so called racism think again.
Following their thinking this must mean that "as a species the small differences in the genetic makeup between the monkeys and man must mean "the biologically meaningful diffferences between man and ape are so insignificant as to barely lead to any determinging differences.

To the fellow who asked what race his children were. his wife being of Torrres Strait Island descent and he being of many different white race descent. The obvious answer is part Torres Strait Islander and Mixed European descent. Most people wouldn't need a science book to work that out.

To Lucy Montgomery- You are very quick to pull the I am superior and more intelligent than you because I have a University degree. Is that not what you accuse racists of doing, putting on the I am superior to you attitude. You may have a degree in one area but you are in no way any more superior or more intelligent than people who for various reasons may not have gone or had the opportunity to go to university. Isn't that a form of supremacist thinking?

Lucy the UNSW Law graduate(as if thats worth anything) said,

"So by that logic if a white Australian commits an act of paedophilia on a white Australian child is it a race issue?

Why can't the death of an Indian child by an Indian man simply be a horrific crime. Why do YOU have to make it into a race issue. I don't think that anybody else has so far."

Where have your been Lucy? You don't think that anybody else has made this into a race issue so far? On what planet are you? The whole of the media plus the multiculturalists have been making these crimes in Australia against Indians into race issues, trying to make out White Australians are racists. This has been happening for the last year or more.
Where have you been? At this very moment our foreign minister Mr S Smith is in India, for some reason trying to reassure the Indian PM that Indians are safe here in Australia. Why is he doing that? Because all of the media plus the multiculturalists like yourself are telling everyone that these are racist attacks on Indians and white Australians are responsible. That's why he's there Lucy, because people like YOU lie.

So I have not made this a race issue, people like YOU have. And now it is begining to backfire on you, as Australian's are finding out the truth. These crimes are indeed committed by Indians themselves.

4 of the last 5 Indians murdered here and initially blamed on white Australians have turned out to be committed by INDIANS. Face the facts Lucy. You can't or just refuse to see what is right in front of your eyes.

Oh and it does concern multiculturalism. The MC'lists such as yourself are continually bombarding the rest of Australia with the great advantages of MCísm. I am pointing out some of the obvious disadvantages. Seems only fair in a balanced debate to hear from both sides, both benefits and disadvanages, or would you prefer we do not discuss the disadvantages and focus on the lovely foods.

C.J.

Scientists need to study the time frames of those genetic differences, that may also play a huge role in determining racial acceptance or hostility also. The fellow that said he was descended from about five different countries does not seem to give any thought to the fact that all these countries are predominantly European and white. Say for a minute that he did have some evidence of African in him. That connection may be far outfactored when it comes to racial acceptance (in either the white races or the black races)because it was a thousand years ago whereas his European connection only dates back to more recent centuries.

Lucy the UNSW Law graduate said,

"More importantly, none of the mainstream media has made this a race issue. There hasn't been any comment by the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald or the Australian that endorsed a view that this was a race issue. "

Let's have a look at that

"The Age" headline said "Man charged over death of INDIAN boy"

see http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-news-national/man-charged-over-death-of-indian-boy-20100307-ppw6.html

Lucy, if it's not a race issue why mention the that the boy is Indian. The murderer is just as indian as the boy but no mention of that in the headline. Why would that be Lucy?

"The Sydney mornign Herald" headline "Australia launches probe into INDIAN toddler's death"
see http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/australia-launches-probe-into-indian-toddlers-death-20100305-poli.html

Lucy, again if it's not a race issue why mention the boy is Indian. What has that got to do with the story. Why not just say ".. probe into death of toddler".

"The Australian" headline today, yes today Lucy "Time to stop Playing the RACE card"

see http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/time-to-stop-playing-the-race-card/story-e6frg6ux-1225837937282

this article talks about the lull in reporting racist attacks in Australia until the death of this poor little boy, when it again increased.

Lucy, again what planet do you live on?

All of these papers you stated had "There hasn't been any comment by the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald or the Australian that endorsed a view that this was a race issue" have indeed made mention of a race issue.

I have only mentioned 3 articles here to demonstrate that what you have said is totally false. There are countless other examples in the same papers, and other media.

Lucy, I notice above in your comments when you can't back up your views with facts you attempt to discredit me by attacking my character, for instance "what kind of person does that" etc etc. Or you attempt to pull off the "I'm a big time lawyer, does that make you feel small or inadequate". You told me this in a previous thread. These are basically all signs that you have no factual basis for your views. So lets just stick to the facts.

Examples of prime indicators of profiles of racist bigots;

[1] Gross exaggeration and obsessive distortion;

As attributed to ozzie: “Now 4 out of the last 5 murders in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack.”

“So I have not made this into a race issue, people like YOU have. And now it is beginning to backfire on you, as Australian’s are finding out the truth. That’s why he’s there Lucy, because people like you lie.”

“So I have not made this a race issue, people like YOU have. And now it is beginning to backfire on you, as Australian’s are finding out the truth. These crimes are indeed committed by Indians themselves.”

[2] Gross exaggeration and obsessive distortion, with attempted manipulation;

As attributed to ozzie: “Face the facts Lucy. You can’t or just refuse to see what is right in front of your eyes.”

….”The MC’lists such as yourself are continually bombarding the rest of Australia with the great advantages of MCism. I am pointing out some of the obvious disadvantages. Seems only fair in a balanced debate to hear from both sides.”

The contributions of CHERFUL are so observedly ‘whacko’ I’ll just acknowledge that to save space. Really, these posts are so ‘out there’ with their seriously disturbed, myopic and toxic, racist obsession, exposing them is like ‘shooting ducks in a barrel.”

How does the fact that the media mentioned that the victim was an Indian boy turn into an accusation of racism? The simple answer is that it doesn't.

You see what you want to see... and if anybody is lying well.... Lets just say that the facts don't back you up.

For the record, I'm smarter than you, I'm better educated and since I'm guessing that you were fibbing about being a doctor, I think its fair to say I'm better off. But more importantly, I'm a better person because I would never use a child's death to score cheap points in a debate.

People, take a look at what he wrote in another thread:
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10024&page=0

He actually uses the word "enjoy".

I didn't think that this thread could stoop to new lows. But I was wrong.

This child's death is a tragedy. Its got nothing to do with race or multiculturalism or anything. Its just a horrific tragedy. Show some respect.

Lucy you try to weave your way out of it. You precisely stated "More importantly, none of the mainstream media has made this a race issue. There hasn't been any comment by the Age, the Sydney Morning Herald or the Australian that endorsed a view that this was a RACE issue."

However as I have shown above, all ot these three papers have viewed this as a race issue, that's why they have included the boys RACE in the headlines. If it's not a race issue why do they state the race? Why lucy? Why is the foreign minister in India right now? Why lucy? Because it is a RACE issue.

Your comment about me using the word enjoy just demonstrates how you fail to read the whole thread before commenting. Read the comment directly behind mine by David. My comment you make reference to is in reply to your Politically correct friend David Jennings who gave examples of violent Anglo Australian crimes and asked me to enjoy. Read the thread Lucy, before you make ignorant comments. My comment is in direct response to this

David Jennings said

"Now here are some cases involving crime by Anglo-Australians.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCCA/2010/3.html
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCCA/2010/1.html
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCCA/2010/13.html

Enjoy"

I notice again when you have no facts to base your opinions on you turn to insulting people's character.

CHERFUL
"To the fellow who asked what race his children were, his wife being of Torrres Strait Island descent and he being of many different white race descent. The obvious answer is part Torres Strait Islander and Mixed European descent. Most people wouldn't need a science book to work that out."
Dear Cherful
So I am a descendant of many different “white races"? The English race? Scottish race? Irish race? German race? These are not races: they are national or ethnic groupings.
As children inherit half their genes from their father and the other half from their mother then my children are of course “mixed” descent. But what if any race are they? That was my question. According to your argument they would belong to the English/Scottish/Irish/German/Torres Strait Islander race. And as my son’s wife’s ancestors include Scots, English, Irish, American Indian, then their children must belong to the English/Scottish/Irish/German/Torres Strait Islander/ American Indian race.
And you are right. I didn’t need a science book to work it out. But then where is the science?

What David said was in response to some fairly offensive posts by you.

You can say whatever you want but you can't dig yourself out of this. Even by your standards using Gurshan Singh's death in that way is reprehensible.

The fact that four crimes against Indians in Australians wer committed by other Indians doesn't prove anything. Whites commit crimes against other whites. All it proves is that there was no race element to these particular crimes.

Racist assaults do happen. See below:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/defendant-must-give-victim-130000-20100131-n6ml.html

But obviously not everything that is reported as a racist crime is in fact motivated by racism. Some crimes are opportunistic. Even you can understand that.

ozzie before attack upon your character is possible, first your character must be demonstrated to exist.

- When the posts of these despicable racists are observed in dialogue with each other, their descent into incomprehensible ranting, demonstrated by their deviant obsession with absurd and mindless minutae, is readily obvious, e.g;

blairbar: “And as my children both married members of the Causcasoid, Sub, Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race, my grandchildren belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid, Sub, Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race?”

Only dysfunctional ‘twisted sister’ racists could possibly comprehend such ravings as anything remotely resembling scientific consideration. It is further obvious why only they understand each other, and find the necessity to seek each others comfort. Misery loves company etc.

Their avaricious desire to turn others opinion to their disturbed perspective comprehensively demonstrates their fundamentalist mindset. An apt definition, for their moronic perversity is consistent with such base characteristic.

Blairbar <I didn't need to work it out but then where is the science>

The science is in what CJ Morgan and the academics are trying to push with their "there is more genetic difference between people belonging to a so-called ethnic group(race) than there is genetic difference between people of different ethnic groups.> This is their way of trying to push their agenda of the hippy love and peace we are all brothers generation, which they and I grew up in. They are trying to prove that the brotherhood of man is real at the scientific,biological level.

As you say you don't need their genetic text books to know that you are of predominantly mixed white European descent and your wife is of Torres Strait Islander descent. I have said to CJ before. That when the ethnic fighting breaks out into civil wars over territorial control, the people on both sides of those conflicts know exactly who their recent bloodlines are, they don't care one hoot about racing off to check the lab results in the scientific text books, about some genetic link from thousands of years ago.
The glaring mistake that exists in this science is that it is the bloodlines that the ethnic groups KNOW they belong to, today, who they side with in any conflict.

Hello CJ, yes it is me Sharkfin, with a new username due to my changed e-mail address.

Racism is a subset of hatred. It is commendable to want to reduce hatred, but if such a campaign is based on hatred, its starting point is the addition of another element to the set.

Ngarmada,

Racism is a symptom of the underlying territorial hostility of one tribe (ethnic group)towards another.
Like every other species on earth humans need territory and territorial resources for themselves and their offspring(nearest bloodline) to survive.

Multiculturalism unless intregration takes place at a high percentage is always in danger of territorial attacks(terrorism) or civil wars. Don't shoot the messenger for conveying to you what I believe the realities to be.

World War 1. Was the result of immmigration. War was triggered when the German Crown Prince went down to pay a royal visit to the huge Serbian immigrant section and was asassinated.
The German army was ordered to attack the Serbian immigrants. They called on their old tribe(bloodline) Russia to come to their aid.
Which they did. Surrounding countries became involved, Britain was pulled in to it because of allied treaties and Australia also became involved because of their alliance with Britain. You can look this up on Wikapedia.

World War 2 --When the economic situation in Germany was near collaspe the smouldering territorial hostility of the Germans towards the Jews reached boiling point. The hostility and fighting between the Jews and the Germans goes back many centuries. Some actual recorded history which you can read on Wikipedia tells how fighting would often break out in the towns between the Germans and the Jews. It was stated that the hostility was never about religion but always over economics. In other words it was territorial.

The Sri Lankian boat people -- Tamils, who immigrated in large numbers into Sri Lanka and eventually waged a 20year guerilla war against the original ihabitants for a separate country.


The present conflict between the Palestinians and the Jews ----Is overwhelmingly a fight over land and territory

The Japanese killed 15millions Chinese in their so called expansion for the Greater Good of Asia scheme.
All races even yours have their bloody histories, for reasons of territorial control. Be it the taking or the defence of.

Are you non racist enough to marry out of your ethnic group Ngarmada?

Ngarmada wrote

"Examples of prime indicators of profiles of racist bigots;

[1] Gross exaggeration and obsessive distortion;

As attributed to ozzie: “Now 4 out of the last 5 murders in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack.”

Please explain to me exactly where is the gross exaggeration in my statement?
As far as I can see what I have stated is strictly a statement of fact.

Cherful,
Distortion - misleading alteration: the describing or reporting of something in a way that is inaccurate or misleading.

[1] the problem with your central supposition is its failure to explain the property of diversity as pivotal to evolution. It is obvious diversity would be impossible within humanity if its driving force was predating itself. It is only repressed, bigoted loonies who are obsessed with the fear of the barbarians at the gate. What you believe is not necessarily credible because you believe it. Do you remember Y2K?

[2] to explain the ignition of World War I without addressing the history of the Balkans is irresponsible.

[3] peddling propaganda misrepresenting World War II as a territorial conflict between Germans and Jews is not only historically irresponsible, its reprehensibly misleading.

[4] your overview of the Sri Lankan conflict overlooks the fact the ruling population alleged as committing genocidal atrocities against Tamils, of their overwhelming majority, are committed to the non violent Buddhist faith.

[5] the conflict of the Palestinians and Jews conveniently omits Jews commitment to Zionism. There has never been an Israel, nor Israeli Jews, in the entire recorded history of the region, a record of some 5 millenia, until the creation of Israel in the mid 20th century. For those 5 millenium, Jews and Palestinians generally cohabited the region harmoniously, as their religions are observed historically, as similarly accomplishing elsewhere in the world. Both cultures did not however, enjoy the company of the Hittites, Assyrians, Persians, Romans etc., because those societies invaded them.

[6] The major incursion of the Japanese into China did not occur until after western invasion following the Opium War. Until that time, their incursions into China are comparatively observed, highly restricted of their conquest achievement.

Are you sure you’re in the same dimension as the rest of us Cherful?

Cherful its great to have you here at OLO. I've always felt that Online Opinion doesn't have enough pseudo-intellectual, anti-academic, non-university educated, semi-race theorising, half-wits posting comments in the forums. Ozzie has waged a valiant one man campaign but he is only human or there-abouts. But as impressed as I am about your contribution there are a few minor points:

1. It's Wikipedia not Wikapedia.
2. WW1 was the result of immigration? Well that would be news to AJP Taylor.
3. It was the Austrian Crown Prince Archduke Franz Ferdinand who was assasinated.
4. Austria made the demands on Serbia, not Germany.
5. The Austro-Hungarian army invaded Serbia.
6. The alliances between the Central Powers and the Allies weren't really dictated by blood-lines. Might have been a small factor. It certainly wasn't there in the German-Ottoman alliance.
7. "Territorial hostility" between the Germans and the Jews?? Ethnic tensions maybe but territorial hostility?!
8. Don't believe everything you read on Wikipedia - it could have been written by anyone (even Ozzie).
9. Take a look at a map of India and Sri Lanka. Sri Lanka is way closer to South India than it is to North India. So the Tamils were probably in Sri Lanka first. The North Indian Sinhalese most likely came later.

Its interesting how you conflate "territorial hostility" with economic issues.
Perhaps if you'd gone to uni you could've worked out how to spell "Cheerful".

I overlooked the Wikipedia error Cherful. Wiki defines the Maori as united under one king. Extraordinarily interesting information being a complete surprise to myself and the overwhelming majority of the entire Maori people.

A colonial construct and tactic for control of the Maori who were ‘troublesome’ [could not be dominated] while independent of their tribes, it is recorded as an abject colonial failure.

I omitted to answer your question. I am a strong believer in the merging of peoples. In fact I strongly support merging racists with outer space.

Ozzie, please identify the last 5 murders of which 4 were committed by Indians. The entire continents of both Australia and India would be intrigued to know. You’re posts are observed becoming increasingly pathetic as incessant, obsessive, racist, rantings.

Ngarmada said

"Ozzie, please identify the last 5 murders of which 4 were committed by Indians. The entire continents of both Australia and India would be intrigued to know. You’re posts are observed becoming increasingly pathetic as incessant, obsessive, racist, rantings."

OK, here they are

A) In early Jan 2010 Nitin Garg (1) was stabbed to death. The killer remains has not yet been identified.

B) In early Jan 2010 Ranjodh Singh(2) was set alight whilst thought still to be alive. The killers were all indians, Harpreet Bullar, Harpreet Singh and Gnrpreet Singh.

C) In early Feb 2010 Navdeep Singh(3) and Kanwaljit Singh(4) were stabbed to death by an Indian student who was sharing the house with them. The killings were over $20.

D) Just the other day Gurshan Singh(5) was killed by an Indian student taxi driver.

So Ngarmada, count them with me. That's 4 out of 5 recent Indians murdered in Australia were murdered by Indians.

Do you disagree with anything here? Did I do the maths wrong?

If not could you please explain why you said this

"Ngarmada wrote

"Examples of prime indicators of profiles of racist bigots;

[1] Gross exaggeration and obsessive distortion;

As attributed to ozzie: “Now 4 out of the last 5 murders in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack.”

and also please explain to me exactly where is the gross exaggeration in my statement?
As far as I can see what I have stated is strictly a statement of fact.

Dear Lucy,

Wikipedia eh? not Wikapedia. Watch your spelling and typing errors Lucy obviously you would be devastated if you made one, being an indoctrinated product of university pompousness.
Did it not occur to you with your superior intellect that Cherful is not meant to be cheerful but is a play on my own name, which happens to be Cheryl. Obviously you have trouble thinking outside the square.

You will find that I may also use the American spelling for things like tonite and color because I think the way they are spelt makes more sense.

The Germans once ruled all of Austria even Poland. I was taught in history at primary school that Australia and Britain fought World War 1 against the Germans, Germany was ordered to disarm after that war and treaties were signed to that effect but 30years after the first World War nobody was policing those treaties any more and Germany once again became heavily militarised.

Who is AJP Taylor, some historian. Not like the historian in one of the Southern Capitals who insisted the Holocaust never happened recently is he?
History is a matter of perception and cultural influence. AJP Taylor may be a man to be admired that does not mean that his perception of history is infallible.

You say it is interesting how I conflate territorial hostility with economic issues.
That's because the land is the economy.

The land provides the resources for us to produce wealth.
We dig it , farm it, leech it,chop it,convert it into plastic or whatever to provide components for computers etc, trade it. As in keeping this country economically bouyant at the moment by selling mining products to China for huge amounts of money. Most of the resources taken from the environment (the land) are transported to the cities where they are sold as goods and services to the people in those cities.
Money is the currency that buys all of us the territorial resources we depend on for our very existence. Food, shelter,clothing.medicines etc. without which we would die.

Well taken literally the sentence by Ozzie is untrue. Four out of the last five murders in Australia committed by Indians? I think not. I think what Ozzie means to say is that four out of the last five Indians murdered in Australia were in fact murdered by Indians.

So technically Ngarmada is right. Ozzie's original statement is an exaggeration. A misdiagnosis if you will.

But that still leaves 33 murders between 2004 and 2009 unaccounted for - see: http://www.yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/anti-immigration-backlash-roils-ties-between-australia-and-india-part-ii

ozzie, that all these deaths have occurred in 2010, and we are currently in early March, it is doubtful the accused, alleged responsible for those deaths, have been tried, far less convicted.

Therefore there may be absolutely no chance in hell findings of those deaths may have possibly been recorded. It may be, further charges are to be laid, or the accused may be released as further evidence comes to light.

Therefore there are no facts, due process is continuing. Until they are concluded there may be no findings. I am aware, alike most bigots, you hold only contempt for due process, that you find it a nuisance, for you believe you retain an inherited colonial right to rule.

However, the consistent evidence of such aberrant dysfunction, is your failure to grasp, comprehend, and process fact. For example, in D), the taxi driver you refer to, has not been charged with murder, but manslaughter and negligence.

As usual, you charge in with rabid fervour, irresponsibly contending libellous and slanderous allegations with not the slightest substance to support them, simply because it suits your biased, racist, agenda.

You demonstrate not the least vestige of reasonable, rational, nor responsible, decorum, nor compassion for others derivative of such characteristic.

Consistent with the malevolent nature of racists, your impulsive and aggressive purpose, is irrationally, only observed to cause harm and destruction.

No Lucy,
Here is my original post

"Strike another plus for Multiculturalism and strength in Diversity. Tonight another murder by an Indian. Now 4 out of the last 5 Indians murdered in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack. Keep the Multicultural propaganda coming. I no longer believe a word of it. I wonder how the politically correct Multiculturalists will try to twist this story around. Surely it must somehow be the fault of a white Australian.
Posted by ozzie, Sunday, 7 March 2010 9:05:19 PM"

Your Politically correct friend Ngarmada has then written

"Examples of prime indicators of profiles of racist bigots;

[1] Gross exaggeration and obsessive distortion;

As attributed to ozzie: “Now 4 out of the last 5 murders in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack.”

Notice how he has very deviously changed the words from "last 5 indians murdered" to "last 5 murders". How can that possibly happen? If he had simply cut and paste that wouldnt have happened'. So he actually has gone to a conscious effort to deceive.otice how all the other words in the sentence are exact.

So what I originally stated was correct.

Ngarmada,

Can you explain how you came to change the words I used. Your UNSW educated (should that be uneducated) Lawyer friend Lucy pointed out that you had infact changed "4 out of the last 5 Indians murdered in Australia" to "4 out of the last 5 murders in Australia". As I have pointed out above this cannot happen by chance.

notice also how many of these murderers have been on scam student visas, doing shonky courses to gain residency. These shonky courses include hairdressing, cooking and UNSW Law school (the easiest entry of any law school in the country on the 90s).

Cherful, your appreciation of economics is comparative of a whimsical corn cob mentality of former eras, most recently of vistas alike the TV show ‘Green Acres,’ or an economic vanguard alike ‘F Troop.’

That you are obviously ignorant of fundamental economic dynamics of commodities markets, by which both agricultural and mineral products are defined [although both are different commodities] is patently obvious.

The GFC [Global Financial Crisis] would not have impacted globally to the extent it has, if your chow hound view of economics existed. For the GFC may be observed realised from extreme speculation within the derivatives markets, as result of failure to implement the required regulation when advised by peak regulatory authorities, well prior to the event of the crisis.

Derivative markets were originally developed from commodities markets, basically formulated upon projected future yields. e.g. next years crop.

Finally, beware your fellow bigots observing your affinity and familiarity with American spelling, for they are wolfish in their demand for the rigour of english grammar.

NGARMADA

< The problem with your central suppostion is it's failure to explain the property of diversity as pivotal to evolution>

I actually did say something related to that but my post was well over 350words and I had to keep deleting text before I could post it.

What I said was that I believe that the intermarriage of races is probably a good thing for the human race. In fact because of all the conquest in history a lot of the human race has been interbred and this has probably made us stronger as a species.

Ironically it is because of man's historical conquering and ethnic warfare(territorial warfare in fact)that we have had a lot of that inter breeding. I am just putting the suggestion that it would be better to do it the peaceful way and that is to encourage intermarriage and intregration rather than tribal separation( multiculturalism) which has shown throughout history to eventually lead to territorial wars.

That's why I asked you if you are willing to marry or to see your children marry other races, because I believe it is better to do this peacefully than risk having it done the other way.

It is my observation that all wars, civil wars, ethnic cleansing wars,separatist country wars, consist of two elements, one ethnic group or bloodline trying to kill another bloodline with the end result being the control or taking of land.
Religious wars also consist of the same two elements. Religious fundamentalist groups often form big tribes because their religion prevents them from marrying outsiders. They then want to take control of the land and it's laws when they become strong enough.

I can see these same two elements in both world wars no matter what slant the university folk like to put on it and that tells me that these wars were also territorial.

Simply a typo ozzie, which is reasonable considering your contentions are such wild exaggeration, distortion, and attempted manipulation. You continue to contend murder when there is no such proof, nor findings. Obviously you are attempting that old known standard propagandist technique of indoctrination, known as attributed to the obsessions of carpetbaggers.

For that purpose is designed to deceive readers of your posts unaware of your dysfunction. You assume that by contending your allegations repetitively, it will be retained by its familiarity within their memory, and when retrieved accepted as fact. For in your moronic, twisted, mindset, you delude yourself into the belief you are able to dupe anybody. Fat chance, get real!

Ngarmada

Your appreciation of economics is lost in the same clouds as people who have lived so long in the West that they think money is the real wealth and don't realise money is useless unless you can purchase products that have been supplied or made from products that come directly from the environment. (territorial resources provided by the land)

Yes the crash happened because of deregulation, but one of the main reasons it happened was because the the houses abandoned by people in the sub prime-mortage crash could not be sold at that time. So the money owed to the banks on paper was worth nothing without the sale of territorial assests to back it up. All the materials and components used to build houses are from resources that are extracted in some way from resources provided from the land. Also, the ground the houses stand on is in itself, territory that has a lot of value. When it couldn't be sold the money value as it existed only on paper had no value without the actual resource.

I also note that derivative markets could not be discussed without the mention of territorial commodities. Don't knock my simple view of things,a lot of things are simply explained, For some reason people lose touch with this and look for complicated answers, where there are none.

Yes I know their are people who are fanatical about the English language but it is they who are wrong if they think the language is not constantly evolving. A lot of those same people who may have studied English Shakespearian plays written a few centuries ago as a lot of us did when I went to school should realise that the English spoken just a few centuries ago is barely understandable to us today. The computer jargon and texting is bringing new words into being everyday. The word Gay meant happy when I was a young girl, until the Gay mardigras began. Now it means homosexual.

"Wikipedia eh? not Wikapedia. Watch your spelling and typing errors Lucy obviously you would be devastated if you made one, being an indoctrinated product of university pompousness.
....
You will find that I may also use the American spelling for things like tonite and color because I think the way they are spelt makes more sense."

People do make minor spelling errors. But if you read your posts you actually make quite a few. But sure, you could always argue that language is "evolving". In fact, the appearance of the word "Wikipedia" proves this to be true.

"The Germans once ruled all of Austria even Poland. I was taught in history at primary school that Australia and Britain fought World War 1 against the Germans, Germany was ordered to disarm after that war and treaties were signed to that effect but 30years after the first World War nobody was policing those treaties any more and Germany once again became heavily militarised."

When Germany ruled Poland and Austria that was World War II!! Not World War I. In WWI the Allies fought against Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria and the Ottoman Empire (Turkey). I think the treaty that you are referring to is the Treaty of Versailles which was signed in 1919. Trust me, Germany was not re-arming 30 years after WWI. In 1948 Germany was still fully occupied by the Allies.

AJP Taylor was a famous historian.

"You say it is interesting how I conflate territorial hostility with economic issues.
That's because the land is the economy."

Well, not for the Jews in Europe in the centuries leading up to the Holocaust. The Jews were barred from farming and thus made their money through usury and other mercantile endeavours. So the land isn't the only economy.

Its pretty obvious that you are out of your depth in any intellectual discussion

Cherful, multiculturalism as it is defined, is not referred to as interdepenceculturalism, therefore I don’t understand how you may have the concept confused as anything other than its defining the inclusiveness of people coming together harmoniously?

As indicated, factual evolutionary diversity develops at the rate it is observed, therefore the central pursuit of peoples is not just killing each other, but participation in meaningful integration. Humanity by nature are communal beings. Recluses living solitary existences is very rare.

I’m afraid the rate of diversity observed resulting of rape from sacking and pillaging, could not cut the mustard, for at the least, it does not retain the advantages for procreational success, of contented consenting individuals. Its common sense.

In the animal kingdom the construct for procreation is overwhelmingly paternal. The males of many species challenge each other for mating rights, but not in any way predominantly with the females. The gender that carries the next generation does not engage in such behaviour for obvious reasons.

Kidnapping women by their hair against their will, and spiriting them off on horseback never to be seen again, until the society they later conceive storms the ramparts and reasserts its civilisation upon the decadent hordes, may appear very exciting in Hollywood or Bollywood, but it’s a myth.

Therefore this redneck obsession of the gathering of multitudes of hordes, potentially to invade the comforts of the west, may only be observed reflecting the fear of bigotry, and covert malevolence of its own historically colonial intent.

If you’re lacking romantic distraction, perhaps you may confide your phone number to ozzie, blairbar, or Jayb, for by the irrational, dysfunctional characteristics they demonstrate, I doubt they would have any difficulty breathing heavily into a phone.

Ngarmada: The gender that carries the next generation does not engage in such behaviour for obvious reasons.

Oh yes they do, but a lot more subtely then men.

Kidnapping women by their hair against their will, and spiriting them off on horseback never to be seen again,

Historically the reason this happened was to spread genes around & prevent tribe becoming inbred.

Jayb, for by the irrational, dysfunctional characteristics they demonstrate, I doubt they would have any difficulty breathing heavily into a phone.

?Yes I can, but I charge 10c a breath. For you $5. ring me. ;-)

Ozzie, you are clearly just a sad little weirdo. I think Ngarmada actually saw you for what you are and very accurately described you in a previous post.

Using a toddler's death in the way that you did. Well clearly you're not married and you don't have children.

There's no way you are a doctor - I hope you are enjoying life on the MEDIAN wage.

Cherful FFS buy a history book.
Ngarmada, tone it down, please?

David you claim to be an academic yet you wrote...

"You've made a claim about being a "medical practitioner" but that is a very broad field covering doctors, nurses, radiographers and even general hospital workers."

That about sums up your general level of knowledge. Like I said before any 6th grader knows what a medical practitioner is.

Also, its interesting you seem to degrade people who you believe earn less than you. I find such an attitude repulsive and arrogant. To judge people by what they earn truely shows the type of low life you really are. For the record if you actually are an academic at an Australian Uni (and I find it hard to believe any Uni could employ someone with such a lack of general knowledge, except maybe UNSW Law school) then I will be earning at least 3 times what you do(and that's assuming you are a Professor).

Unfortunately these days Australian Uni's have been swamped by the Politically Correct Leftist idiots. And I'm sure even you David are smart enough to know that your one of them.

Given that a Prof makes $150K, then you should be earning $450K.

Can't somebody who earns $450K find something better to do?

Cherful,
management is a science, therefore predicated upon the pursuit of truth. Its practice is to accurately define what is, what was, what may be prospective, how to get there proficiently, and avoid deprecatory consequences. Therefore its application cannot be romantic or idealistic, for such denial of its principles would irrevocably defeat its purpose, as does occur. e.g. GFC

Current reliable projections of western macro economic fundamentals, demonstrate them reliant upon the multiplier expenditure rate. e.g. associated with ROI [return on investment], if you invest a dollar, you require at least a dollar return plus costs to break even.

Those current reliable projections determine the west is entering a period of gradual decline, realised from the rate of growth of the economic tigers, and their comparable, low production costs. The trigger for the onset of this period of western decline, is thanks very much to the redneck cowboys who gave us the GFC.

I included the correct definition of commodities, their markets and their relationship to the GFC meltdown, that you may have observed accurate perspective of the association of property to current general economic fundamentals. For the majority of the percentage of global wealth today, is on paper. A significant percentage of current economic pursuit is predicated upon futures, or credit if you like. This is not necessarily an accident looking for a place to happen if its managed astutely, although its flaw is observed as the human condition.

In the US, if foreclosure is realised on your mortgage, by law you may simply walk away owing nothing. The fact is these houses and properties became valueless, and are still traded at premium discount today. One case reported was a property traded for one dollar to discharge its continued costs liability.

The per capita value of Australian home properties is currently the most expensive in the world, exceeding London and New York. [Inside Business-ABC TV- 4/10/09]. Therefore in current economics, the historical correlation between assets and value, may be observed long since superceded.

Gee Dennis,
I actually found this site when I was emailed to observe the article; The Ethics Council: some inconvenient truths. The attacks on my qualified comment by the parasites I continually identify, was not of my initiation. It is however observed consistent of their malevolent intent in pursuing that agenda on this site.

Therefore I observe your protestations of apparent reason as entirely colonial of their intent, as I wonder whether your enthusiasm for reason would prevail over potential double standard, if these pack animals were able to verbally savage me. For I am not your colonial ideal of a noble savage, and I am confident of my abilities to engage ‘weirdos’ on any level if required.

As you would be well aware also, ‘sad little weirdos’ retain the potential to be disturbed, psychotic, dangerous, weirdos, as the plethora of record of racism clearly attests. I may only assume from your attitude, if it doesn’t affect you, you couldn’t give a toss.

As Lucy indicated, this is a forum for intellectual debate, however, as is common, it does not take long for pseudo intellectual, redneck, bigots, to find and colonise the site, pursuing their dysfunctionally toxic and venal attitudes en masse.

It’s a known colonial tactic, repeated by those of such ilk for time immemorial. It is intended to intimidate those who would dare challenge it, by smothering the debate. Where have you been?

By enforcing them to engage the focus of the debate, the purpose of these sites, they readily compromise themselves by their own irrational constructs, and are exposed. As you acknowledge, it was I who identified the disturbed nature of ozzie, when you had obviously been sharing posts with him before I arrived. Blairbar, Jayb, Jon J, and others share the same malevolent intent.

Trust me on this, I’m an ethnic migrant. Unlike your privileged status, ethnic migrants are one demographic of their intended victims. You cant always be a straw man Dennis.

"As Lucy indicated, this is a forum for intellectual debate..."

Well then what are you doing here Ngarmada. Your posts are nothing but complete dribble.

Ngarmada also said..
" ...potential to be disturbed, psychotic, dangerous, weirdos, as the plethora of record of racism clearly attests.."

and

"..ethnic migrants are one demographic of their intended victims."

Seems to me most racism in Australia is against the ordinary white person. Overnight another shocking example of ethnic violence when two dark skinned individuals attacked a white person in a wheelchair and I believe fractured his skull. Now if the colour of these people had been the reverse you would be one of the first people jumping up in the air claiming Australia is a racist country.

I will await your next lengthy post full of complete useless dribble.

Gee ozzie,
I cant possibly imagine why you are identifying the incident if you hold that view. Is it perhaps because you are a "sad little weirdo with a delusion he belongs in a medical faculty?"

Give it up ozzie, noone is buying it anymore, you're exposed as the ugly creature you are.

Wow Lucy,

That's the first time on OLO I've seen you get a maths question right.
Yes, three times 150 is 450, well done. The only way is up from here.

Something better to do?
Apart from my work, what could be better for Australia than defeating your dirty, politically correct, leftist, damaging and deceitful views. i view you as the type of person who jumps in to bully people on the PC viewpoint even though you know little of what your talking about. Have a look at how quickly you jumped in to make a sarcastic comment about how you thought someone else didn't know what the median wage was. You quickly discovered it was YOU that didn't know what it was.

Then again you quickly critiszed me for the sentence concerning murders of Indians in Australia, without bothering to read the complete threat and note that your friend Ngarmada had deviously changed the wording.

Lucy, just wondering if you would agree with another OLO article written by academic Mr Thampapilliai where he states

"The Dawkins reforms led to the creation of new universities. For example, there are now 38 Australian law schools providing legal education to undergraduates. A university education is now available to more Australians than has ever before been possible in our nation’s history. It is very hard to begrudge anybody a tertiary education. Particularly in law - where the bachelor of laws degree (LLB), is fast replacing the bachelor of arts degree as the generalist degree of choice - greater access to information results in a greater capability to participate in the social, cultural and economic life of our society."

See now this is where you are lying. I didn't make a sarcastic comments about the mean or median wage. I just queried what the figure was.

Go back and read it again without the grudge you obviously have against me. Then apologise. And quit following me around. You are a creep and a weirdo.

"Then again you quickly critiszed me for the sentence concerning murders of Indians in Australia, without bothering to read the complete threat and note that your friend Ngarmada had deviously changed the wording."

You endorsed the wording in your own post in reply to Ngarmada. That made it open to criticism.

"As Lucy indicated, this is a forum for intellectual debate, however, as is common, it does not take long for pseudo intellectual, redneck, bigots, to find and colonise the site, pursuing their dysfunctionally toxic and venal attitudes en masse."

Ngarmada I agree to an extent. I think Ozzie is a person who has serious problems. He clearly has an inferiority complex. He has some particular beef with me and I'm not sure why. Other people have said worse things about him but he continues to chase me from thread to thread, misrepresenting what I say, and engaging in personal abuse. He does not do this to any of the male users on the forum.

Ozzie continually tries to make everything out to be a race issue. He has a persecution complex. Take note of this:
"most racism in Australia is against the ordinary white person. Overnight another shocking example of ethnic violence when two dark skinned individuals attacked a white person in a wheelchair and I believe fractured his skull. Now if the colour of these people had been the reverse you would be one of the first people jumping up in the air claiming Australia is a racist country."

Ozzie misrepresents the story. There was no race element to the attack. The two youths were drunk. They made no mention of race and ONLY ONE of them was identified as being an Islander. Ozzie also has no way of knowing what I would have said if the story was reversed.

He's clearly lying about being a doctor. He's obviously a very unhappy person with a huge ego, who blames other people, particularly women, for his problems. Thats why he is so persistently abusive.

But you are right: "Give it up ozzie, noone is buying it anymore, you're exposed as the ugly creature you are."

I completely agree.

Lucy: Ozzie misrepresents the story. There was no race element to the attack. The two youths were drunk. They made no mention of race and ONLY ONE of them was identified as being an Islander.

In that statement from a Lawyer we have it. If the positions had been reversed & the person in the wheelchair had been black & the attackers white then there would have been racial demonstrations in the street all over Australia calling for Justice for the black man.

As that was not the case, you are saying that it wasn't a racial attack. A?! Am I missing something here?

When the Indians were attacked there was no mention that they were Ethiopians/Somalis. Just that they were Australians. As Professor Sumner Miller would say,"Why is it so?" Why does the Media cry Racist when it's White on Ethnic but not racist when it's Ethnic on White.

Can I get a Lawyers perspective on this problem please?

This thread comes up asz the most commented. But its really just people slagging each other off.

Lucy,
If you are not using a pseudonym the potential for locating your identity is possible, although it is not my intention to alarm you.

If this guy is following you from thread to thread, that he patently demonstrates himself as a weirdo, he may be a deviant, therefore you have no alternative than to contact the Police immediately, who will quickly be able to identify him. At the least he will run for cover.

Remember, if the US had been paying attention there may have been no 9/11, as similarly for Australia there may have been no Bali.

Also you may observe Jayb and jiplug were quick in coming to his defence, and diminishing the seriousness of your contention.

Reasons he may be stalking you, are that you are a woman, a professional, and if he was to stalk me or other men, he may realise a disappointing result if he ran into us.

To reiterate earlier comments I have posted, these whackos demonstrate the potential of animals, and pack animals at that.
I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them have form.

Ngarmada said,

"Lucy,
If you are not using a pseudonym the potential for locating your identity is possible, although it is not my intention to alarm you.

If this guy is following you from thread to thread, that he patently demonstrates himself as a weirdo, he may be a deviant, therefore you have no alternative than to contact the Police immediately, who will quickly be able to identify him. At the least he will run for cover.

Remember, if the US had been paying attention there may have been no 9/11, as similarly for Australia there may have been no Bali.

Also you may observe Jayb and jiplug were quick in coming to his defence, and diminishing the seriousness of your contention.

Reasons he may be stalking you, are that you are a woman, a professional, and if he was to stalk me or other men, he may realise a disappointing result if he ran into us.

To reiterate earlier comments I have posted, these whackos demonstrate the potential of animals, and pack animals at that.
I wouldn’t be surprised if many of them have form.
Posted by Ngarmada, Thursday, 11 March 2010 12:00:37 PM"

So our game is up, Jayb, jiplug and myself are all middle eastern terrorists plotting against Lucy and the West. Thanks Ngarmada, you really are off this planet.

NGARMADA -- <The per capita value of Australian home properties is currently the most expensive in the world, exceeding London and New York, therefore in current economics the historical correlation between assets and value may be observed long since superceded. >

And therein lies the danger as I stated, we have forgotten that value(money)is worth nothing if nobody can afford or is willing to pay that much for the asset. The money value depends on the actual house and land (territorial assests) and what money anyone is prepared or able to pay for them at the time.

My daughter and I were actually discussing how governments used to base how much money they printed on the amount of gold they had. The gold was an actual tangible asset so that the money had back-up value. They no longer do this. You may know more about this and the intricate manouverings of the economic market and so have your own views but my view is that man doesn't spend all the money he does on waging expensive wars and being prepared to die on the battlefield for nothing. The big pay off is control of the territorial wealth that the land provides.

LUCY MONTGOMERY <the Jews were barred from farming and thus made their money through usury and other mercantile endeavours. So the land isn't the only economy.

<the Jews made their money> so they made their money through usury and other mercantile endeavours. I had heard the Jews were bankers and such in Germany and they were very good at it. Banks sell money for a price(interest) we all know this but where did that money come from that they had in their banks to start with. They didn't just pull it out of the air. It must have been made up of a lot of deposits from businesses, and earnings from the Jews or German populations. Businesses need something to sell, usually something taken from the land and turned into goods and services(buses)to sell to people.
So the money the Jews used for their usury and mercantile endeavours was being made from you guessed it, territorial resources.

And why was the money able to be sold at high interest rates. Because people desperately desired it to purchase territorial resources like houses and land. Yes everything in your house and my house has come or been made from an environmental resource. The land of course providing the environment.

There is of course the sale of intellectual property,I'm sitting here trying to tie that in to territorial resources. Doctors study medicine and they are paid for that knowledge. But they do dispense medicine which is something also made from environmental resources. The money paid to Doctors and lawyers and songwriters etc. is probably coming from the earnings of ordinary people who make a living providing goods and services of some kind. It would be pretty hard to provide any service without some kind of resource backing you up as far as I can tell. Like hearing testing machines, MRI machines and Scans etc. Then there is the electricity and lighting and plumbing provided to keep the hospitals running.
I cannot see that any economy can exist without some kind of environmental commodity involved in some way.

Thats such a stretch. People can never admit that they were wrong. They just windbag it more.

I don't agree with ozzie btw.

Ngarmada,
In the animal Kingdom the construct for procreation is overwhelmingly paternal. The males of many species challenge each other for mating rights.

Wasn't that similiar to what happened in Bosnia. The Serbs killed all the men and boys(who presented a territorial challenge to them)and raped the women who did not present a territorial challenge to them but actually provided them with the advantage of being able to produce more of their own bloodline and thus bring the women and any children back under their territorial control. (don't you ever wonder why they didn't kill the women as well?)

LUCY MONTGOMERY,
<When Germany ruled Poland and Austria that was WW2 not WW1.>

I thought I stated that Germany invaded Poland in WW2 and that's when Britain declared we were at war with Germany. A report I read on this area in Wikepedia a while ago said that the Germans once ruled the whole area before the coming of the Romans who enslaved everybody. I couldn't find this article again last night, but I did find something about the Habsburg Dynasty. That the Archduke who was murdered by the Serbs was a member of the Habsburg Royal Lineage. The Habsburgs ruled over Austria and other tribal areas like Serbia.

The Habsburgs were very friendly with the Germans especially the German Aristocracy and often let them rule in some areas.

However these details make no difference to the point I was making that WW1 was started by the same old tribal territorial warfare,because the Serbian Nationalist Group called the Black Hand wouldn't live under the control of the Habsburg Royal family and wanted control of their own territory so they assasinated the ArchDuke according to Wikipedia anyway. I don't know if it's right but I did hear somewhere that the Germans were related to the Saxons.
Maye I should read their history but I don't feel like it.
It's like a stuffed tomato recipe. Life's too short to stuff a tomato.

Cherful,
I understand your point, however as I attempted to indicate, the interrelationships within contemporary economics realise the fundamental you are identifying, comparative of a time leap to current observation.

Yes all wealth may be observed derived from a source of natural resources, but to suggest that fundamental explains the dynamics and paradigm of current economics is simplistic to the point of its observation as misrepresentative and misleading.

For economic diversity, evolved from the time cavemen traded tools, is unrecognisable to current practice, value quantification, and identification of asset bases. In further example, difference is observed of even those prime natural resources your observation refers to, where some are renewable [they replenish], others are linear [their formation may be realised over such vast periods, effectively for our civilisation, they are not replaced before they are expended.

Therefore, owing to observation of the development of the multitude of economic interrelationships developed, and their progression to current practice, you may appreciate how a simplistic explanation of current economic practice and phenomena is neither accurate, constructive, nor useful, and is in fact misleading.

It’s a disingenuous, misleading, and distorted, redneck and feudal construct, to attempt to imply, contemporarily, the landholders, alike the legend of Atlas, are upholding the wealth, prosperity, and destiny of the world. For starters, the asset bases and economic application of mining companies acknowledged as market leaders, are so diverse they are comprehensively unrecognisable to the model of which you ascribe. Their prime purpose and focused pursuit is the enrichment of their shareholders, to the exclusion of all else if necessary.

- The killing in the Balkans is identified accurately as genocide. We are differentiated from the rest of the animal kingdom by our ability to comprehend our actions and intent.

ozzie,
once again you misunderstand me completely, for I could not possibly suggest your intellect, along with the other cohort grubs you identify, could possibly be compared to those of middle eastern terrorists. It would be ludicrous to suggest your intellects are remotely of similar capacity.

Go and have a cold shower, and come to think of it, use hot water as well, and soap, you might feel better.

For stalking women on the net is an act of depravity, consistent with the profile of a parasite of which I accurately defined you, and the irrational dysfunction, fear and cowardice, of a racist bigot you demonstrate in your posts. Such behaviour is clear of your intent, as you wouldn’t try stalking me, for even with such dysfunction you are at least able to comprehend the outcome, and its consequences.

What you are too crazed to understand however, is the ability of a civilised, developed society to protect those of its members predators may consider vulnerable, alike women.

Ngaramda. I was just wondering. Do you work in the Government design office where they design Forms?

And, the over use of "big" word doesn't make you look intelligent. It makes you look Dum. I have a big crake up when I read your posts. I show them to everyone then we roll around the floor laughing. Thanks for that. I'm a great fan of good humour.

I suspect that you are a closet reverse racist. You hate whitie don't you. It definately shows in your posts.

"I thought I stated that Germany invaded Poland in WW2 and that's when Britain declared we were at war with Germany."

No you didn't. In fact you went on about WW1.

"A report I read on this area in Wikepedia a while ago said that the Germans once ruled the whole area before the coming of the Romans who enslaved everybody."

A bit of an exaggeration. Again, it's Wikipedia. Germany did not exist as a nation until 1871. So there were no 'Germans' to speak of in Roman times. There were the Goths and the Huns though. Only the Southern part of Germany was part of the Roman Empire.

"I couldn't find this article again last night, but I did find something about the Habsburg Dynasty."

Probably a good thing.

"That the Archduke who was murdered by the Serbs was a member of the Habsburg Royal Lineage."

Yes. Correct.

"The Habsburgs ruled over Austria and other tribal areas like Serbia."

Perhaps we're being a bit loose in the use of the word 'tribal'. The Serbs lived in villages and had an organised society. They weren't hunter-gatherers.

"The Habsburgs were very friendly with the Germans especially the German Aristocracy and often let them rule in some areas."

Yes they were 'friendly' but only after the Austro-Prussian War of 1866. Remember, modern Germany was a Prussian dominated state from 1871-1945. But, no, the Austro-Hungarian Empire didn't let the Germans 'rule' in some areas of their empire. Its not like taking your neighbours car out for a spin.

"I don't know if it's right but I did hear somewhere that the Germans were related to the Saxons."

Saxony is a state in Germany.

"Maye I should read their history but I don't feel like it."
'Maybe' you should read some history. It is interesting and helps explain the world that we currently live in.

Jayb,
As I’ve indicated, I suspect you are a criminal, of the mentally twisted parasitic description, for if you weren’t you may not be defending the indefensible behaviour of your associate ozzie so fervently. The other indicators are your base descriptions of bodily functions as metaphor, and your use of terms alike “whitie.“

Definitions I utilise may be incomprehensible to you owing to your level of illiteracy, for I not only use the terms and spell them correctly, unlike dysfunction you demonstrate, I comprehend what the terms mean.

Your attempts to impress me are pathetic, for as is known, the feature of the pretensions of would be criminal tough guys, is their crippling mental dysfunction, that realises the incapacity derived of their irrational and impulsive behaviour, to get out of their own way.

Apparent is your obsessive hatred of anyone with different views to you, that demonstrates the dysfunction of your racist malaise. Keep coming Jayb, I’m confident Police would be eager to reacquaint themselves with you and your ‘mates.’

And no, I’m not a bigot alike you, I just object to parasitic racist creeps alike you, for your racism is comprehensively and unredeemably destructive, a bane upon prospective civilised society.

JayB a crime is a racist crime when it is committed, in part, because of the race of the victim.

So if I attack an Asian and make anti-Asian comments in the course of that assault then it would be a racist crime.

But if I attack somebody of another race, that doesn't make it racist by itself. There needs to be something else that clearly marks it out as a crime motivated by racism. Really, I have to say something racist.

For example, the rapes committed by Bilal Skaf were race hate crimes. Because Skaf said he was attacking the girls because they were 'skips' and they were being attacked 'Leb style.' That is clearly a race crime.

Whether court gets it right or the media reports it properly is another question.

So when Ozzie reports crime by Indians and suggests that they are racist crimes he's not being honest. Really Ozzie and Ngarmada are mirror images of each other. Both have an agenda against a particular group because they feel slighted by that group.

Ngarmada, I'm not sure who Dennis is. But I'm pretty sure that JayB is NOT a racist and he's NOT a criminal. I'm not sure if I'm a colonialist either.

Again David tries to twist the truth. The sad little poorly paid academic, that just can't make it in the real world. Now he states I have portrayed these attacks by Indians as racist. I have done no such thing.

David stated...

" So when Ozzie reports crime by Indians and suggests that they are racist crimes he's not being honest."

What I actually stated was quite the opposite. In an earlier post I said...

" Tonight another murder by an Indian. Now 4 out of the last 5 Indians murdered in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack. Keep the Multicultural propaganda coming. I no longer believe a word of it. I wonder how the politically correct Multiculturalists will try to twist this story around. Surely it must somehow be the fault of a white Australian."

So its actually David who is being dishonest. People such as David and the other politically correct multiculturalists have tried to paint these crimes as committed by Anglo Australians, mostly by refusing to tell the full story and state who the attackers are. Such people do not like it when the truth comes out and it is found that the attackers are actually from the same migrant group.

At least I got into uni the first time around ;-)

And just quietly, I think I'm making a fair bit more than you are.

Not that it matters to me. I didn't bring up salaries etc.

David the little lying child. Trying to deflect the conversation when your lies have been found out. You really have not accounted for your comment..

David said...

" So when Ozzie reports crime by Indians and suggests that they are racist crimes he's not being honest."

What I actually stated was quite the opposite. In an earlier post I said...

" Tonight another murder by an Indian. Now 4 out of the last 5 Indians murdered in Australia have been committed by Indians. Still this case was constantly presented in the media as being a racist Australian attack. Keep the Multicultural propaganda coming. I no longer believe a word of it. I wonder how the politically correct Multiculturalists will try to twist this story around. Surely it must somehow be the fault of a white Australian."

So yes David, these were not racist crimes committed by Anglo Australians as you and your promulticulturalism friends try desperately to make out. Trying to make ordinary Australians feel guilty for these crimes. These were committed by Indians, no matter how much spin you try to put on it.

David also said...

" And just quietly, I think I'm making a fair bit more than you are.

Not that it matters to me. I didn't bring up salaries etc."

Well unless you have some type of employment outside the Uni system you will not be earning anything like I do, because you and everyone else knows academics are paid poorly. i doubt there would by any academic on much above 200K.

Also it actually was you that brought up salaries. Here's what you said above..

David said...

" There's no way you are a doctor - I hope you are enjoying life on the MEDIAN wage."

David if your going to try and misrepresent what I have said, are you so dumb as to not know that people can just scroll back and see who said what.

David also said..

"At least I got into uni the first time around ;-)
Posted by David Jennings, Friday, 12 March 2010 "

So get used to it, because that's where you will be for the rest of your LIFE.

Just because you have been to UNI doesn't make you better than anybody else. Most Academics I know are great in their field but outside that, another story. I have known a few academics in my time & most of them couldn't tie their shoelaces. They knew nothing of the world outside their field & what they do know is all screwed up because they look at the problem in a narrow sense. No big picture.

examples of a few I know personally. A Uni professor who went to school, then went to school to be a teacher, then went to UNI again for more Qualifications & so on & on. Her only life was on Campus. She thinks real life is just like it is in Acadamia. A Social worker who had a bad marriage, went to TAFE to do "Get Well" courses then went to Uni to get a Social workers Degree. She went to work in a Womans shelter. ALL men are bastard, because that's all she knows & the text books say so. A famous Forensic Scientist who would come to work with his trousers on insideout & hadn't noticed or came to work with a sneeker on one foot & a thong on the other & wondered why he was limping. His VW, well that's another story. Brilliant person. He never knew what day it was. An Ecological scientist who would spend months doing research & never signing off on anything. I had to start his mower every time he mowed the lawn. He couldn't drive a nail into wood. He was always thinking that the world was coming to an end. If his wife wasn't home he couldn't even make a sandwich.

That's fairly much the same with these bleeding heart, politicaly correct people, everybodys a racist except them. They only know what they have been taught in Acadamia land, which bears no resemblence to real life. These fanatics see racism in everyone. What sad people these people are.

WE ARN'T ALL RACISTS. WE JUST HAVE A DIFFERENT OPINION TO YOU. GET REAL.

NGARMADA <the killing in the Balkans is identified as genocide . We are differentiated from the rest of the animal kingdom by our ability to comprehend our actions and intent.>

Don't sell the animals short, they know exactly what their intent is when they are defending territory or killing to eat. If they didn't know what their intent was how do you explain the way they stalk prey.

Humans gloss it over with big sounding words like genocide or defend it by calling it a holy war or a war against the devil such as the infidel or the heretics.
They cannot face the fact that they like the animals are driven by two big survival instincts, the sexual mating instinct and the territorial instinct.
I know that you are going to say that we can control these instincts. A true test of our real ability to control these instincts would be if a law was passed saying that nobody was allowed to have sex for a year. Some people especially some women would have no trouble complying with this at all, some people could comply most of the time, some could only comply about half of the time, and a big percentage of people would find it hard to comply at all.

Why would it be so hard for people to use their intellect as you say to over-ride their need for sex, because it is a basic biological survival instinct, and it cannot be over-ridden by all of the people all of the time on any permanent basis. It is thus obvious
that we are driven by our biolgoical instincts and our intellect is a tool we use to gain that which we instinctively desire.

The other big survival instinct is the territorial instinct. Mankind has been engaging in this across much of recorded history.
What is genocide but the wiping out of the other race (tribe)off the territory

LUCY MONTGOMERY perhaps we are being a bit loose in the use of the word tribal. The Serbs lived in villages and had an organised society they weren't hunter-gatherers>

I have had this discussion with academics before. I think academics feel a bit superior to the word tribe. They are in fact showing their supremacist thinking. As though: I can't be part of a tribe because that would mean that I must be primitive or black or a hunter gatherer or inferior or something. I have said before that I prefer the word tribe, because I think humans are still tribal. A tribe to me is a group that has basically intermarried with each other over the last few generations and beyond. The old saying that blood is thicker than water, proves itself to be true over and over again when the chips are down and survival is an issue and is even obvious in every day life the way families and extended families and tribes support each other.

I am not that interested in wading through a lot of historical details, I prefer the big picture and you still haven't proven to me yet that I am wrong in my assessment of the big picture. That all wars and conflict can be found to have genocide and the taking of land or territorial resources as their primary motive despite what political or religious reasons may have been stated publicly.

I read enough of history and books in my earlier years to see the big picture, I am not very interested in stuffing tomatoes these days unless it is really necessary to the point I am making.

LUCY MONTGOMERY

I did read in Wikipedia a couple of nights ago that the Habsburgs did allow the German Aristocrats to rule in some villages. I assume they still had to defer to the Habsburgs but they were allowed to keep their ruling class status over the lower classes in some villages.

Cherful, anybody can write anything in Wikipedia. Even teenagers can write entries in the Wikipedia. It is not a reputable or authoritative source of information. You might as well be quoting graffiti.

I'm not an academic. I just have the history channel on Foxtel!

Supremacist thinking is when you feel you are inherently superior to other people because of their race, religion, nationality etc. Ask Ozzie. I don't feel that I'm 'inherently' better than you. I just know the facts on some of the points you raised.

You have a very loose definition of tribe. I doubt its one that can be found in a dictionary.

Ditto with the expansive definition of the reasons for war. Though you were again careless with language; Genocide "and" the taking of land? The Germans were not trying to genocide the French in WW1.

Really what you're saying is that you dont want to back up your statements with any proof. You just want to make sweeping statements. Whatever.

Thanks for your sly little remarks, Lucy, you really are just a politically correct troll that thinks anybody who doesn't agree with you is beneath you.

Lucy said....

"Supremacist thinking is when you feel you are inherently superior to other people because of their race, religion, nationality etc. Ask Ozzie. I don't feel that I'm 'inherently' better than you. I just know the facts on some of the points you raised. "

however she also said..

"Cherful its great to have you here at OLO. I've always felt that Online Opinion doesn't have enough pseudo-intellectual, anti-academic, non-university educated, semi-race theorising, half-wits posting comments in the forums."

definitely no supremacist thinking there...nor here

Lucy again said...

"At least I grew up to be a lawyer. What exactly is it that you do again?"

and again..

"For the record, I'm smarter than you, I'm better educated and since I'm guessing that you were fibbing about being a doctor, I think its fair to say I'm better off."

yet again, no supremacist thinking...

"I'm clearly in a different category than your friends and I'm clearly on a different intellectual level to yourself. Plus I'm more rational."

Lucy, you obviously have an inferiority complex. Then again why wouldn't you. You're just A UNSW Law school lawyer. One of only 2 Law schools in NSW in the 90s that let in the lowest of the low HSC achievers.

Ah! Good old ozzie and his twin obsessions: Indians and Lucy.

I'm glad that you eventually got into medical school after having been denied a place .. by an Indian. Congratulations also on graduating in 2007 or 2008. But sadly, I dont think that a 2nd or 3rd year doctor makes the same as a Professor. You forgot that a Professor can have dual appointments, here and in Europe, and you forgot consultancies. I wasn't going to say it but you were the one who kept mentioning money.

Your inadequacies are painfully obvious. I almost feel sorry for you. I won't comment on your personal life. But I think I can see why you are obsessed with Lucy. As a great doctor once said, you can't turn a donkey into a racehorse.

"To believe that all people's on the planet are equal is just a lie." Posted by ozzie, Saturday, 13 October 2007 9:36:36 AM

"Indians in my opinion Indians are one of the worst. They are nice to you until the know you status. Once they find out your below them they will treat you like dirt."
Posted by ozzie, Monday, 3 December 2007 8:02:36 AM

"Just last month I was complaining to my wife that our local petrol station only employed Indians. This is located just off the SE in Toorak. For the last year I have seen nothing but Indians work there."
Posted by ozzie, Friday, 13 April 2007 4:03:36 PM

"I have noted a huge explosion in the numbers of Indians in Melbourne over recent years. In my opinion they are nothing but trouble."
Posted by ozzie, Tuesday, 25 August 2009 10:26:25 AM

"The vast majority of this is all ethnic crime. Third world people bringing their ways of life here."
Posted by ozzie, Thursday, 28 January 2010 5:32:38 PM

"Most people from other countries are simply more primitive than Australians. .... Are there any advanced countries from non white cultures?"
Posted by ozzie, Saturday, 4 August 2007 9:53:18 AM

"I do believe Aborigines and some other ethnic groups cause far more violence than other groups .... I firmly believe most of the increasing violence on our streets is due to immigrants ( or children of migrants)."
Posted by ozzie, Friday, 7 August 2009 8:51:22 PM

This guy wrote an excellent response to Ozzie:

"Actually, if you were to tell the truth, you'd say that the real cause of the problem is a clash of different cultures, not race. Race is just skin color, whereas culture is the attitudes people have picked up through their upbringing and through their associations with people they choose to mingle with.

Even the Caucasian race is made up of many sub-cultures: greenies, bikies, nerds, goths, bogans, hippies just to name a few. Just because bikies engage in antisocial activities like selling amphetamines doesn't mean we victimise every Caucasian by association. (In fact, we don't even victimise bikies that do the wrong thing!) If you were to look carefully, I'm sure you'd find that there are a whole range of African sub-cultures. Most are not violent, just as it is with Caucasians.

The other problem with making the issue one of race is that you are putting the targeted person on a hiding to nothing: there is nothing he can do to improve the situation in the eyes of the critic. He can't change his skin colour and nation of birth. However, if you nominate the problem as being one of bad or incompatible culture, at least it can be addressed without causing some extreme behaviour in the targeted person like sullenness or withdrawal from society at one end to violently lashing out at the other.

All that bringing race into the equation can do is to make the situation worse for everyone."
Posted by RobP, Friday, 16 November 2007 8:36:21 PM

Hi again Lucy Montgomery.
If that is your real name you are fortunate, it has a nice ring to it.
Thank you for your advice about Wikipedia, I didn't realise it was so unreliable.

I think the abandoning of the word tribe probably relates back to the time of the British Empire, when tribes were regarded as inferior natives(primitive blacks) and not anywhere near as advanced and intelligent as the British saw themselves as being at that time. I'm not defending it, but at that time that was how the British Empire saw it. I remember growing up watching adventure movies where some white heros would go to Africa and face the perils of dangerous animals and savage tribes running around with spears.

Owing to this meaning of the word tribe in British minds they were never going to refer to themselves as a tribe even in a dictionary so it is not surprising that English dictionaries base their meaning of tribes on a primitive level. It is o.k to refer to tribes of whites back in hunter gatherer days but they would not have accepted that term being used about themselves in more advanced times. They basically associate the word with lap laps and spears. That's why I think their abandonment of this word is to do with their supremacist thinking more than any reason why the word still doesn't mean today, what it did back then, large groups or societies of people who have basically intermarried with each other over long periods of time and live together in the same area, region or country.

LUCY- You say Hitler did not seek to ethnically cleanse the French. Hitler had stated and written, that he wanted a German State world-wide, peopled with a superior race of preferably blonde-haired blue-eyed Germans. So what he is saying is that he wants to rule over every country in the world that he can take and populate them with a German bloodline. Show me how that is not territorial. Isn't that what animals in the wild try to do. Dominate territory and populate it with their own offspring.

I think that he saw it as a priority to cleanse Germany of the Jews before anywhere else and so save his own tribe the Germans, from having to compete economically with the Jews for survival in times of reported economic hardship in Germany. Maybe the Jews were too good at running banks and were starting to look too strong financially for the Germans. Maybe they gave cheaper loans to the Jews than the Germans. The German people must have quietly took possession of all the wealth and assets that the Jews left behind when they were forcibly removed from their homes. It was kept very quite that he was sending the Jews to the gas chambers in Germany. It may not have been as easy to hide something like that in France especially with the French Resistance.

The war was in full swing when the Germans occupied France, they were at war with Britain and having to maintain control in countries that they had already occupied like Poland and France and when that was taking too long Hitler also invaded Russia, that wouldn't have left a whole lot of time or man power to methodically ethnically cleanse all of the French as he had done in Germany. It was said that Hitler viewed the races who were more white more favourably than the swarthier ones. The Saxons did overrun Britain at some point in the very early centuries. I'm not sure how he felt about the French, If he'd won the war we probably would have found out

I was actually referring to World War One. In WWI the Germans were lead by Kaiser Wilhelm II. WWI was a clash of empires. I said that the Germans were not trying to genocide the French in World War One.

But I mostly agree with you on Hitler. In World War Two the Germans were lead by Hitler. If Germany had won that war its fair to say they may have wiped out or enslaved a number of European countries. I think Hitler had fairly sympathetic views to many of the Western European nations. But he regarded all the Eastern Europeans as sub-human.

Anti-semitism in Europe had a long history. It owed itself more to myths etc than reality. But jealousy does drive people to do terrible things.

Thanks for the compliment. LM are my real initials and Lucy is the name of my great aunt.

I can see you point on the word tribe.

Having just returned from a week's holiday and now reading through this discussion, I'm alternately bemused and amused by the sheer amount of rubbish that's been posted. It seems that the racist contingent have been increasingly ridiculous, while the few brave souls who try to counter the hateful drivel that they post have been drawn into personal spiteful exchanges that don't reflect well on anybody.

If any OLO discussion demonstrates the wisdom of Mark Twain's dictum about refraining from arguing with fools, this thread would have to be it. I therefore won't contribute anything more beyond this post, other than to point out some of the more outstanding gems of ignorance.

I think the classic statement of contemporary racism comes from Efranke, who writes

<< Breeds of dogs are analogous to human races >>.

This little pearl of idiocy is compounded by the proudly ignorant CHERFUL/Sharkfin, who says

<< Efranke gave you the commonsense obvious answer >>

before launching into an exposition of her idiosyncratic and ill-informed exposition about "tribalism".

Yes, 'race' and racism are commonsensical, which is why they persist in the absence of any scientific rationale. They are so commonsensical that their various exponents here redefine the concepts out of existence in order to accommodate their own deeply ingrained bigotry - which essentially reduces to 'my phenotype/ethnicity is best and all others are arranged hierarchically below mine'.

[cont]

[cont]

If the odious ozzie isn't telling porkies about his/her profession, I have grave concerns about the quality of medical treatment meted out to any patient of theirs who is not 'white'.

I still have little idea of what Ngarmada is on about, beyond labelling everybody who diagrees with them as racist - quite erroneously in several cases, such as the obvious misinterpretation of blairbar's admittedly annoying banter. Indeed, I think that blairbar has most successfully illustrated the ridiculousness of 'racial' classification in this comment:

<< So Jayb my children belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race?
And as my children both married members of the Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race, my grandchildren belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race/Causcasoid; Sub; Nordic, Aryan, Celtic race? >>

Unfortunately, nobody seems to have understood his point - perhaps because it was obscured by his puerile spat with Ngamarda, whose pompous language could obfuscate anything.

Anyway, see you all on another thread, no doubt.

P.S. I'm still chuckling about Ngarmada's "Neanderthal Gnome".

Prepare yourself CJ. I am sure that Ngarmada is busy preparing one of his mighty diatribes to launch against you. He completely destroyed me.

That CJ may only find literary errors to amuse him indicates the pompous prat he is.

I concur with blairbar, destroying him, ozzie, jayb, and the other classic racists I have had the pleasure of engaging on OLO, demonstrates such crippling dysfunction as attributed to their malaise, realises their despatching observed perfunctory of its ease.

Alike CJ, David is observed demonstrating the same colonially ignorantly callous nature, that realises they retain no integrity relevant to the issue of racism. That they are not the targets of such malevolence, they believe by making the right noises, that entitles them to engage the debate as a game. They attempt to impress they are above it all, when in fact they demonstrate they are classically colonially, morally and ethically bankrupt.

The nature of racism is identified as malevolent, and alike the malaise of a rabid dog, where it threatens the innocent, realistically you do not retain the privilege of attempting its retraining, you are obligated to put it down.

Of course if the source of the disease may be removed, that is the optimum outcome, although I suggest with the indifference demonstrated by duplicitous attitudes alike yours, it does not bode well for such potential. If such required action for adequate and appropriate response to such racist threat draws a bad press, my condolences your sanctimoniously moronic sensitivities are upset.

Alike 9/11 and Bali, you may finally alter such attitudes, when the conflict generated by such malevolent racists comes crashing through your doors.

Cherful, your comparative of instinct is inane. In many species the female gender are generally totally disinterested in sex other than when they come into season. That is instinct. Such regime may never be observed in humans simply owing to the fact we are able to reason such regime as anachronistic.

Comparably, humanity is observed a paradigm shift from the definition you describe. I think if I met you in the mosh pit of a Wolfmother concert, I would be truly scared.

CJ- welcome back, I thought you were awfully quiet.

You say- yes, race and racism are commonsensical which is why they persist in the absence of any scientific rationale.

For a moment I thought you had come to your senses and forgotten your strange theory about phenotype genetic flawed science, which I seem to remember you saying in a previous debate, meant that science had proven that race did not exist. ( I still must need glasses because I seem to see people of different races when I go out.) Then I realised that you were actually being sardonic. Or maybe a Freudian slip perhaps.

<So Jayb my children belong to the Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid Sub Nordic Aryan Celtic Race.>
Oh for heaven sake!
As Danny DeVito said to Arnold Schwarzenegger in the movie Twins when Arnold said, "WE are Twins." " Oh Obviously!"

If civil war ever breaks out in America between the Africans and the Whites, the Whites can just shout out "don't kill me I'm Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid"
They'd say what the f---k are you talking about white boy.

One thing with academics they never let common sense get in the way of any of their so called scientific proofs as long as it backs up their attempts at social engineering

NGARMADA-comparably, humanity is observed a paradigm shift from the definition you describe.

How so? They may have gradually discovered modern inventions and tools but they themselves haven't changed that much since the first modern human appear ed. It doesn't seem like anything has changed much to me. Look at the violence and killing in the last 50 or 60years.

. The Japanese slaughter of 15millions Chinese and the rape of Manchuria in the years leading up to WW2
(oh I forgot you told me the Colonialists made them do it)
. WW2 The German slaughter of the Jews
. The Somalian conflict
. The Rwandan slaughter
. The Bosnian massacre
. The 30year terrorist war by the IRA for control of Ireland
. The attempt by Indonesian Militias to take Timor
. The 20year Tamil conflict in Sri Lankia
. the Chechnya conflict in Russia
. The Arabs and the Israelies
. China and Tibet or is it Burma(can't quite remember)
. The attack on the Chinese population in the Solomons
. The Twin Towers
. The Bali Bombing
. Iraq War
. Bombings in London
. The Taliban from Pakistan controlling Afghanistan
. America in Afghanistan
. Sudan
. Fiji
. The congo
Have I missed any? It doesn't look much like we've evolved to me.

You wouldn't acknowledge the truth of any thing that didn't blame the colonialists for all of mankinds problems.
Blame the colonialists is like a religion to you. If the truth jumped up and bit you on the bum you'd probably think the colonialists did it.
It's the human condition and the fact that we are still the same as we were thousands of years ago. You won't solve the problems of mankind unless you first acknowledge the truth of what you are dealing with. The human animal is the same the world over. Your hatred of the colonialists is quite rabid in some of your posts proving you are just as racist against them as you accuse them of beng against you.

""If civil war ever breaks out in America between the Africans and the Whites, the Whites can just shout out "don't kill me I'm Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid""
They'd say what the f---k are you talking about white boy"
And if war breaks out between the Africans and the Whites, the Whites can just shout out "don't kill me I'm Negroid/Causcasoid."
They'd say "what the f---k are you talking about Barack Obama?"

Wow very many comments so hope I am not repeating

the key word is young. Australia is ok for 20 somethings but there is no opportunity when you are over 45, or very little. Pauline is correct in what she says for her age.We only see 20 somethings as useful or to be honest brainwashable.

Migration allows us to continue to fill the pool of younger workers. Less immigration would require employers treat the workers we have better and lose the luxury of prejudiced employment practise that is rampant at the moment. We would increase productivity through more efficient exploitation of the people we already have. I agree the lost opportunity though not sure it can be found anywhere these days. Like the army, get them young and brainwash them is corporate compliance and please nobody actualy think. This is todays opportunity.

Not sure what muslims ahve to do with it, sounds a bit self indulgent to introduce a hobby horse into the scheme of things.

Indeed, blairbar - I am destroyed, and mightily so. As far as I can glean from Ngarmada's pompous prattling, s/he thinks that 'white' people are proscribed from speaking out against racism because we are descended from colonial oppressors.

I suspect that pointing out that Ngarmada's attitude is in itself racist would go over his/her head.

Hi CHERFUL - while the social category of 'race' is indeed commonsense, so is the idea that the sun revolves around the earth. Fortunately, science has exposed the fallacy of both ideas, but racism lingers among the ignorant and bigoted. Racists are the social 'flat earthers' of our time.

You are, however, quite correct to assert that humans are essentially the same the world over. I think you are also spot on when you say to Ngarmada

<< Your hatred of the colonialists is quite rabid in some of your posts proving you are just as racist against them as you accuse them of beng against you. >>

What you need to do now is to read somewhat more widely than Wikipedia, in order to apply your naive insights to your own ideas. You really are in no position to make broad and sweeping statements about human history, because you apparently know so little about it - and this is compounded by your defence of your ignorance.

Cherful,
Its good to see your involvement in this debate is generating your observation of historical fact. Now its just your aberrant interpretation of those facts you need to deal with. For all the conflicts you identify may be sourced to the origin of colonial and imperial insurgency.

Yes it may be suggested human evolution is apparent as not evolving much past its predation of itself, but to project responsibility for such conduct as attributed predominantly to primal instinct pertaining to our human condition, is as downright dishonest as the contention of weapons of mass destruction, and the lie of children overboard.

Continue

Identical to the intent of those lies, the historical record of the incursions of colonial imperialism may be observed in common as driven by indifference and intolerance to others. Even greed and covetousness observed in such incursions may be attributed to this source.

For the leaders who implemented these instruments of such destruction, were fully aware of the potential, and their own intent. It is classic observation of the failure of leadership and management, and will continue to proliferate while those with banal, and worse, malevolent attitudes, continue to be observed as the status quo tolerating and supporting such leadership. It is a blueprint for more of the same. It is the incubator from where such dysfunctional leadership is born.

Empirical dominions responsible for such destruction, from the dawn of observed civilisation, are observed not only confined to those of european origin, for there were the Moors, the Ottomans, the Mongols, the Hittites, the Assyrians, to name but a few.

The Mongol empire was the largest the world has ever seen, however you learn little of that phenomenon in western education, for as the posters demonstrate on this thread, the west is myopically obsessed with itself, the flaw and failure observed of every empire that has descended into decline.

That the civilisations and cultures of those former empires either remain or have transcended into others, realises the majority of people are open to reason

Good to have you back CJ. Point taken about how the dialogue has degenerated. Though it has improved in the last couple of posts.

"One thing with academics they never let common sense get in the way"

Seriously ... people in glass houses ...

"If civil war ever breaks out in America between the Africans and the Whites, the Whites can just shout out "don't kill me I'm Proto-Australoid/Causcasoid"
They'd say what the f---k are you talking about white boy."

No - they would say that, "We had a civil war from 1861-1865. The North fought the South to end slavery. Sure things haven't always been smooth sailing since then but as human beings we have a lot in common and the things we have in common are stronger than the things that could drive us apart." So nice try with the Turner Diaries rhetoric but it won't happen. The other point is that conflict tends to be the exception rather than the norm in human relations. You ignore the fact that all the conflicts you listed co-existed or were followed with long periods of peace elsewhere in the world.

"the key word is young. Australia is ok for 20 somethings but there is no opportunity when you are over 45, or very little."

I actually agree with this. Its very true. But I don't agree with the part about limiting migration. I don't think it will lead to the outcome you seek. If anything we will lose jobs.

Ngarmada, personally I'm sorry for whatever bad things that white people have done to you in the past. It does actually sound like you have had a troubled life. But we are all individual human beings. Can't you see past race and anger?

Less obvious, but no less insidious, is the latent bigotry retained by those alike Dennis and CJ, who promote themselves as enlightened, when readily observed is their contempt for the scientific pursuit of truth within the issue of racism. They feign the enlightenment of being above it all, when in fact their indifference is observed as derived from their detachment, that it doesn’t directly affect them. It is a classic academic failure relevant to the ignorance and naivety of a first year graduate.

Seriously, who is this Dennis character? Why do I never see any of his posts?

How can you be a "first year graduate."??

Thanks David. I don't know about you and Dennis, but I'd rather be a latent bigot than a blatant one ;)

DAVID JENNINGS-<they would say that,we had a civil war from 1861-1865.
The North fought the South to end slavery.>

The Columbia Encyclopedia fifth edition 1993, Columbia University Press states-The name Civil War is misleading because the war was not a class struggle but a sectional combat having it's roots in political, economic,social and psychological elements so complex that historians still do not agree on it's basic causes.

Personally I think that the American Civil War was more of a territorial war and that the Slaves were only freed because it benefitted the North and stopped the overwhelming wealth that was flowing into the coffers of the Southern States. (as it would flow into any company today that didn't have to pay wages) I read an account of this quite a while back. There was a lot written about the increasing political power of the South and how they were gradually increasing their influence and political hold on the North because of their wealth. However I cannot remember the source so I will just state this as my private view. However I have provided a source I looked up tonight. Being the Columbia Encyclopedia above.

It always puzzled me anyway, why northern whites would send so many of their sons to die in a war to free black slaves. It just doesn't seem to fit with the white attitudes in those days. I mean to lose sons that you love dearly like that with no payoff of some kind.

I know that Abraham Lincoln said in one of his speeches. "We will SMASH the SOUTH." A strange thing to say. Not,"WE Will FREE the SLAVES." Maybe again a Freudian slip in an unguarded moment, indicating it was really all about the power of the South and not the Slaves.

I have no idea what the Turner Diaries rhetoric is, but if it agrees with my ideas on conflict I will make a point of looking it up. Only not using Wikipedia as I have been told by Lucy Montgomery that it is unreliable. Hence Columbian Encyclopedia above.

DAVID JENNINGS <You ignore the fact that all the conflicts you listed co-existed or were followed with long periods of peace elsewhere in the world>

That's because the conflicts are territorial, and it takes growing territorial pressures to set wars off. If the pressures are not there then peace reigns.

Like populations that have grown so big that they now have the numbers to challenge the other governing group who may have treated them as second class citizens for many generations. This may really come to a head in countries that have gradually become poorer and poorer and there is less and less to share around and more and more crowding.

In countries that are wealthy with low populations and plenty of land and resources the different races will live quite tolerantly together for quite long periods of history. As long as there are no perceived territorial threats of any significance to set off hostilities.

Look at Rwanda and how that suddenly flared up after those people had been neighbours and lived together peacefully for a fairly long period of time. One of the reasons stated was that the tribe that did the killing had feared losing control of their territory because the other tribe was building up in numbers again.

It's getting late here and my eyes are nearly closing and I am finding it really hard to concentrate so I think I will go to bed.

Cheerio and goodnight everybody

Apologies David, it was not my intention to assign you an alias, or to mislead by misconstruction, that terminology of a first year graduate. For as it doesn’t affect me directly you may attribute it to the disaffection of my indifference.

Finally CJ, you confess your bigotry blatantly. It is significant to identify, the difference between latent and blatant, is the exceeding dishonesty of the former.

Cherful, during the 14th and 15th centuries, the wealth of China grew to such extent its population exploded realising it the most populous peoples in the world. I am aware this statistical phenomenon remains today.

Five centuries later China was invaded and occupied, not for its territory, but for its commodities, and advanced skills, which had been coveted by the west for that period.

Sweet dreams.

Personally, I am heartened to see that we have moved from Wikipedia to an encyclopedia. But I'm not sure what to make of your Civil War argument. I would think it possible to both "smash the South" and "free the slaves".

But at any rate I think this threads time may be up. So I wish you all well and will no doubt see you all in future threads!

Please Dennis/David, I was hoping Ngmarda had his/her day on this thread and now you are encouraging him/her to post his/her comments on future threads.

blairbar, I appreciate your innate, inane, fear of regular intellects which must fill you with the awe of dwarfs compared to giants. And I understand fear is the central and driving component of your dysfunction, however it may help to get your teddy from your mommy and go and have a good lie down.

Maybe your mate ossie will give you a cuddle, since his stalking has driven away Lucy from OLO. I know you and ossie believe your devious cunning is clever, that you may hide behind the anonymity of OLO, for you are right to fear the majority of reasonable people, they will never tolerate toxic parasites alike you.

Ngarmada,
I have not stalked anyone. I think if you look back at the posts you will find it was your poorly educated PC leftist frinend that started continually critisizing my posts first to which I responded. Anyway, I'm going to do you a big favour now and save you posting anything for the next year. Below I have made a summary of your previous and future posts. So please do not post again. I note you still have not explained how you lied about changing the words of my post to suit yourself.

Ngarmada wrote in 2010

waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle, waffle waffle, waffle, waffle,waffle, waffle, waffle,

"the difference between latent and blatant (racism), is the exceeding dishonesty of the former."

Correction - the difference is that the former is honest enough to recognize the capacity within themselves for racism and that they make an ongoing choice to overcome that capacity. The latter excuses the exercise of their racism as though in their case it is somehow justified.

R0bert

ozzie, Lucy identified you accurately as a stalker, owing to your toxic, venal, twisted, dysfunctional, malevolent, manipulative, attempted approaches to her, as observed on the threads of OLO. That it may be observed of that record her contention is not unreasonable, speaks for itself. That more than one poster has identified this aberration defining your behaviour as observed from your posts, with none supporting your contentions, is further significant.

You may deny this record as much as you like, however there is nothing you can do to change these facts, no matter how much you attempt to manipulate the evidence, except in the future, you could find mental health support. Lucy is right, you are sick.

Oh Robert, you obviously have not been following the posts on this thread, or you would not be, once again, misconstruing the context of the dialogue of the posts.

Because you are observed metaphorically, getting your arse kicked in a debate in view of your peers on another thread, is no reason to pettily attack me on this one, observed as a covert attempt from observation of those peers I refer to.

My advice is simply, try and wean yourself from your mommy, find somewhere you may grow up without offending everyone, and get a life.

Ngarmada, I've responded here because your foul attempts to label CJ as a racist annoy me as do the slurs on the other thread which seem to be your standard fare against anyone who expresses disagreement with you.

CJ probably disagree on more threads than we agree on but he is also a poster who will if treated with courtesy will normally respond in kind. On the topic of racism he has been conspicuous in his strong stand against it over a number of years.

If I am getting my arse kicked elsewhere (something which I suspect has more to do with your views of self importance than reality) in front of peers it would not be the first time and I can cope with it.

R0bert

Thanks for that R0bert, and for your previous comment. Your interpretation is exactly what I meant, i.e. a recognition that everybody has a potential for bigotry (including racism), and that we need to recognise this in ourselves and consciously counteract the tendency towards prejudice against others on the basis of innate qualities like ethnicity, skin colour, gender, sexuality etc. As I've said in other discussions, racism is not confined to 'white' people by any means.

Speaking of which - Ngarmada, is there anybody at OLO whom you don't consider to be racist (other than you, of course)?

CJ, I realise you have considerable investment in promoting yourself as defender of the left on OLO, however, if you are unable to support your comments with credible and qualified debate and argument, all I may offer you is my pity.

For I was invited by a recognised Indigenous leader, to observe an article by a reputable and recognised Indigenous academic, on OLO, to which I posted a comment offering my professional consideration toward its important issue for this country. I was summarily attacked by patently obvious racists, that led me to this thread by simple process of deduction.

During the extensive and rancorous dialogue on this thread, Lucy whom was clearly observed being relentlessly attacked by ozzie, complained of his stalking her on other threads she attended. If one observes the record of the posts involved, and the obvious dysfunctional attitude of the poster identified, as not only identified by Lucy and myself, you may reasonably conclude the contention of Lucy as potential, credible, and reasonable.

This poster, ozzie, is evident as enjoined and supported by obviously like minded associates on this thread, and I perceive you joined the dialogue intent on asserting your perceived de facto authority, ignorant of the issues that had developed.
Continued

For I may only presume your stalking me on these threads, is similarly intended to intimidate, that your neo colonial attitude, is indicated by your banal generalisation of bigotry common to humanity. This realises your conclusion that those non caucasian, incurring malevolent racist attack, should be observed stoic, as colonially historically observed.

As I may only presume your expectation of that stoicism, should have demonstrated my noble patience, until you determined it time for your benevolent defence against those harmless bigots, harmlessly haranguing me. Where no doubt you may have inevitably contrived a noble peace between us, that would allow these parasites to find new targets.

Well here is a newsflash, in my indigenous culture, I am similarly recognised in my own right. I understand OLO is an academic site, not a club for posers. If you are suggesting your tolerance and practice of such blatantly implied intimidation, that is effectively malevolent bigotry, as you potentially indicate in your post, bring it on CJ, I may assure you I am well up to the task.

CJ: is there anybody at OLO whom you don't consider to be racist (other than you, of course)?

But, CJ, she is a racist. She hates White Anglo Saxon people. Therefore she is a racist.

Jayb, where have you been hiding, its page 38 of the thread, and we haven’t seen you since you got ignored on page 32?
I love the tag team you and your associate racist parasites operate. e.g. one gets ignored and sulks for 6 pages, another gets beat up in the debate and disappears to lick his wounds.

I hope you never realise a sudden perception of character Jayb, the shock and awe is liable to do you an injury.

Your continued fabrication fails again Jayb, I’m not racist against white anglo saxons, I just despise those who demonstrate they are toxic, malevolent, racist parasites alike you, most people do.

Er, yes Jayb, that was my point - but thanks for spelling it out to poor old Ngarmada, who apparently missed it. I think s/he's every bit as racist as you.

Ngarmada, you seem to be getting paranoid now as well as belligerent. "Stalking" indeed.

I find myself in agreement with ozzie for once: all you seem to do is waffle on incomprehensibly and try to pick fights with just about everybody when you do manage to make some semblance of sense.

As I said, you appear to every bit as bigoted as the racists here. The sad thing is that you don't appear to know it, in much the same way that many other racists are unaware of their racism.

CJ: As I said, you appear to every bit as bigoted as the racists here. The sad thing is that you don't appear to know it, in much the same way that many other racists are unaware of their racism.

?Please explain. It's now over to you to explain just how you have come to conclusion that I am a racist. As, according to you, I am unaware of this fact.

Mgarmada: I just despise those who demonstrate they are toxic, malevolent, racist parasites alike you,

?The fact that we all happen to be White Anglo Saxon is beside the point, I suppose. ;-) Where have I been. Away helping my daughter move into their new house. I see the tone of the posts haven't changed though. You're still a w@n%er.

Jayb: << Please explain. It's now over to you to explain just how you have come to conclusion that I am a racist.>>

I've explained it to you already in this thread, at least twice.

Jayb: <<...it is accepted that there are 4 basic races & numerous sub races. The Australian Aboriginal is, for example; Cacausian, Sub:Australoid or Austroneasian depending on the particular book & which particular migration date is being discussed. So what's your problem. >>

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10072#163407

Jayb: << I don't know which of the 4 basic races you belong to >>

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10072#163342

Not to mention your repeated and disingenuous assertion that the execrable Hanson wasn't racist. Apparently you missed all that One Nation stuff about Asians, not to mention Aborigines.

I think I'm in danger of contravening my own advice about Mark Twain's dictum about arguing with fools, so unless somebody posts something remarkable I intend to leave this thread to the dribblings of you racists of various persuasions.

CJ: Apparently you missed all that One Nation stuff about Asians, not to mention Aborigines.

Jayb: Strangely all she wanted was a fair & equal go for everybody with no special favours for anybody. Was that so bad?

So CJ, are you saying you want special treatment for one section of society based on their race?

Jayb: Hanson wasn't against immigration, just Boat people or illegal immigrants.

CJ are you saying that Australia should take all the illegal immigrants that can get here by any means possible?

Jayb: << I don't know which of the 4 basic races you belong to >>

CJ when you do a cut, cut the whole thing not just a little bit that suits you. It's not fair play & is very deceptive when you are that selective. That's playing games with the truth, isn't it?

The quote in full.
jayb: "I don't know which of the 4 basic races you belong to" & personally, I don't care or want to know. Just because I believe that you have shown yourself to be a complete & utter d!c%he@d, & have voiced my opinion as to such, that doesn't mean I dislike your race as a whole, It just means you in particular.

I believe that that is self explanatory & not racist in the slight.

Well CJ, I think you have just made a fool of yourself there.

Yet more Multicultural enrichment. Soak up the diversity and rich cultural influence. See and experience ancient cultural practices in real life. True tribal Maori and Sudanese practices now at your local shopping mall. But for a strictly limited time.

http://makingmulticulturalaustralia.blogspot.com/2010/03/sudanese-and-maori-gangs.html

Thanks for that, ozzie. I presume that's your very own hate blog, no?

Charming.

Thanks kindly CJ. However much I'd like to take credit for it I can't. Just a little site I discovered that saves me hunting through the papers. Don't see how you can label it a hate site when it appears to contain nothing more than a collection of newspaper articles. I guess people like you see it as a hate site because it points out facts which you don't like to admit.

CJ, pontificating incursions of racism should be tolerated by those taking the incoming, is the classic colonial ideal of the ‘noble savage.’ It reinforces the associated colonial ideal of implied imperial authority.

What is significant as clearly observed, is your extreme tolerance of racists, comparative of your willingness to attack me for perceived racism. For your pretentions to fairness and balance realises your requirement to be seen to be an equal opportunist and non discriminating bigot, especially in such debate as racism. Therefore identifying reverse racism may only be observed an intellectual prize, eh what?

For you suggest those racially vilified or openly attacked so, should be stoically tolerant in order that the sensitivities of others are not disturbed. How dare they complain, and if they do, they are obviously paranoid. Of course we must be aware there is a double standard applicable when we are concerned with saving flora and fauna. You are a class act CJ.

I realise the rancour from engaging racists realises disruption of the decorum of the site, however it may be suggested that if those of you cowardly ‘would be’ intellectuals claiming the moral high ground, had applied yourself to the ethical responsibilities of character and integrity, and dealt with these racist parasites before they proliferated OLO, this engagement would be neither occurring, nor necessary. Although it is a reliable gauge of the increasing international perception of Australia as a racist pariah. And patriot is a derivation of paternal definitions I suppose.

Continued

Don’t tell me, let me guess, you are sympathetic to the plight of Indigenous Australians, but as an Australian you continue to allow them to be officially identified the most disadvantaged indigenous race on the planet.

I envision you cowering out of range of the conflict during the Balkans or Rwandan genocides, with a loudhailer urging the adversaries not to fight. As long as you are seen to be right, hold the moral high ground, and retain the implied protection of the west, a few corpses effectively seperated from you is nothing, is it CJ? Peoples suffering has nothing to do with reality, its about intellectual dinner conversation, and sites like this, isn’t it?

Psychotics alike ozzie, Jayb, and their associates, share the delusion they may force an aryan Australian community by being so obnoxious and malevolent they will drive everyone else away. They are so deranged they are unable to perceive even simple concepts such as the geographical location of the continent of Australia. And you believe it is appropriate to humour them.

These dynamics have been identified long ago, where have you been? Get some therapy CJ, and some character, and some depth, and a life, and grow up.

Ngarmada - do feel free to babble on, but please don't attribute ideas and words to me that I didn't express or say. Show me a single post of mine where I "humour" racists or have said anything at all about "reverse racism", "noble savages" etc. Indeed, I'm critical of those concepts.

Unlike you, I recognise the right of people to have and express ideas with which I disagree - often vehemently. The ozzies and Jaybs of OLO have every bit as much right to spout their bigoted drivel as Ngarmada does. Of course, I have the equal right to point out and argue against your bigotry, which is what I've been doing with respect to OLO's resident racists for years.

That's what tolerance is about, and it works both ways. I find it fascinating that you attack me of all people on this issue. Boofheaded 'cultural warriors' like you contribute just as much to the perpetuation of racist ideas and practices as do the white supremacists who infest this site.

CJ you havent proved me to be a racist yet. You shot yourself in the foot with your last effort. Try again. Your "holier-than-thou" halo is slipping.

Jayb - I'll make it simple for you.

You classify people on the basis of discredited and biologically meaningless 'racial' categories. Ergo, you're a racist.

To help you understand why such categories are meaningless to anybody except racists, perhaps you could tune into the documentary series called "Human Journey" that is currently screening on ABC1. While it's dumbed down for general viewers, the science upon which it is based is up to date. There's been two episodes so far, both of which are available for viewing on iView.

Ask yourself this: how does it increase your understanding of people to arbirarily divided them into categories based on their skin colour or other phenotypic differences?

I merely quoted some of the Anthropogical books I have in my Library.
Eg; A History of Sth East Asia. Books 1/2 Parts 1/2 each,
(Cambridge), The History Atlas of Sth East Asia, (Macmillian), The Penguin Atlas of Ancient History, (McEvedy), The Atlas of World Archaelogy, (Bahn). Just to point to a few of the many books on the subject I own. Admittedly not Uni standard, but enough. I have one of Pilmers as well. One can only go on what information is available & quote that. It may or may not be what one agrees with personally. But the people who write these books are supposed to know so I tend to believe that. Some books differ in thought on exact origins , but that's a healthy thing.
I've spent 3 years living in Sth East Asia with the local people as an equal, not in the cities. I come from country Nth Qld so most of my mates were/are Abo/Islanders, (Now, they... don't like one another). I served in the 15 years in the Army with many Indigenious soldiers who are still great mates. None of the 40 or so ethnic or idigenious people around here that I regularly associate with consider me to be racist. (I've asked them.) On the contrary the said they wished everybody was more like me. I personally don't care what colour, creed or ethnic background anybody is. It's the person you are dealing with that matters. So there ;-p

Dear CJ, did you see all your ethnic friends rioting in Melbourne last night. I couldn't find it on your favourite hate website but it is in most of the papers and video footage is easily available. As you can see most are your Southern European friends. I believe it was a warmup rehearsal for harmony day (dirty propaganda day). So sit back, relax and soak up the Ethnic Violent culture, how wonderful.