Good point CJ.

I found the following article in a dastardly left-wing publication known as "The Australian" it even lends some support to the idea that some of the attacks may have racist undertones:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/survey-shows-racism-rampant/story-e6frgcjx-1225847654617

The article states in part:

"In New Delhi in early March, Foreign Minister Stephen Smith revealed Australian police had made 70 arrests in the past 12 months for crimes where the victim was of Indian ethnicity.

A small number of the assaults "had either racial or racist overtones", Mr Smith said.

Police did not keep statistics on the basis of nationality, which had made analysis of the assaults difficult, he said.

However, the Australian Institute of Criminology, a listed participant at the workshop, had been asked to do an exhaustive statistical analysis of the assaults, Mr Smith said.

"The AIC is currently conducting ongoing research into the victimisation of overseas students in Australia," an AIC spokeswoman confirmed yesterday."

Focusing on only the murders as Ozzie and Forrest do, obscures the other assaults which are quite relevant. But even then, the perpetrators of these crimes might not be motivated by racism - they might just be thugs. Moreover, a few racist thugs do not speak for all Australians. Further, our immigration policy won't be dictated to us by violent thugs, white or otherwise

I think CJ may be right –Jay is having a lend. But I’m more amused by the use of certain marketing techniques like the repetition of certain phrases. It’s at the point of being a kind of a self-parody of an extremist.

How else can we make sense of this:
“All I'm offering is clear thinking on forbidden topics, by talking about Race I'm opening up a Forbidden Zone that most White people never get to see into.”

The Forbidden Zone? It sounds like a program you might see on the Science Fiction channel on Foxtel. I note that the Forbidden Zone is also an evidence free zone. You have not answered a single question I’ve asked.

Evidence is real and it matters.

Then there is this offering:

“Today Political Correctness, which was built on the assumptions that animals have no borders and no war, and that all mental problems are Responses to environmental factors are dead and rotting while standing there backed by the forces of Militant Ignorance.”

When I was younger we had another word for “Political Correctness” – we called it manners.

I don’t recall anybody saying that animals didn’t have borders. And as for that bit about animals and war, have you seen that program called “The Dark Side of Chimps” on the National Geographic channel as well? The rest of the above quote made no sense.

Logic is real and it matters.

Speaking of logic:
“We're not supposed to talk about RACE unless ...absolutely clear that "I'm not being Racist but..."
It's kind of a tell,that Race is the only thing we're not really supposed to talk about,but racism is in the headlines every day.”

Who said we can’t talk about race? Just don’t be obnoxious.
At any rate if we’re not meant to talk about race then why is it being discussed in the papers every day?

Reason is real and it matters.

But the final word should go to Jay:

“Nation of Immigrants! How sweet!”

Yes it is – all of us from diverse backgrounds working together to forge a common future

"David, I'm happy to discuss IQ And The Wealth Of Nations with you"

Sorry Jay, but I wasn't offering to discuss Adam Smith with you. I really don't want to hear your thoughts on race and economics.

"but bear in mind that IQ only works within a certain range."

Yes - that is a good point. Well illustrated.

"People who use IQ to argue their point on Race usually end up with Egg on their face."

I'll tell Herrnstein and Murray. It might be a bit late.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/nov/12/race-intelligence-iq-science

At any rate my point wasn't that those students were doing well because of their ethnicity. But rather that they were migrant kids doing a fantastic job. Thats probably because their parents have encouraged them to work hard and they've decided themselves to make the most of their talent. Its a heart-warming story of human achievement. Its a pity you only saw their race,

David, I'm not here to argue with you.
You're not telling me anything I shouldn't already know but you're treating me like I'm an idiot.
All the smart kids usually leave small backwater towns as soon as they're old enough, they don't want to be left with all the dummies, they want something better so they leave. The thing is that whenever someone needs help they naturally turn to the smart people they grew up with and trust for assistance. It's a bummer if they're not there, under some circumstances the dummies could starve or start attacking each other.
I guess you could say all the book smarts in the world are no good to anyone if you can't be around for the people who NEED you sitting at their table giving them your wisdom and moderating those crazy Dummy impulses.
You're funny! Political correctness equals good manners. Gold!
By all accounts Oliver Cromwell had good Manners but he didn't take too kindly to people who disagreed with his opinions.
Political Correctness is not only LIKE a religion, it IS a religion.
That's why people who practice it are so outraged when people point out that it's based on a belief in the supernatural.
It's just that it's so funny to people like me to be confronted with a person who names all of humanity their God AND their Witness at the same time.
That's funny!

Jay of Melbourne: << CJ. In your opinion I'm a Racist. >>

You got that right, but I wouldn't necessarily use a capital R - I'm not sure whether it's an ideology or a pathology, in your case.

I'm not telling you anything you don't know, and I'm really trying not to treat you like an idiot.

However, after that last post:

<< By all accounts Oliver Cromwell had good Manners but he didn't take too kindly to people who disagreed with his opinions.
Political Correctness is not only LIKE a religion, it IS a religion.
That's why people who practice it are so outraged when people point out that it's based on a belief in the supernatural.
It's just that it's so funny to people like me to be confronted with a person who names all of humanity their God AND their Witness at the same time.
That's funny! >>

...I'm even more inclined to the view that you're having a lend of us. Either way, feel free to share more of your perspectives. Your worldview is fascinating, not to mention quite unique - except perhaps for the mysterious "circle" in which you move and to which you've referred.

I'd like to hear more about that :)

CJ incorrectly stated

"What ozzie should apologise for are his egregiously distorted statistics. He deliberately ignores any violent crime against Indians that isn't homicide, and provides no contextual timeframe.

If he's a medical doctor as he claims, he really ought to know better."

Well I do know better. Better than you CJ. You try to mislead people.

The figures I have given are in no way distorted. Homicides are simply a subset of violent crimes. May studies in different areas never deal with the collection of all data, but deal with a subset of the total. The figures for all violent crimes are not available as I stated in the original post and thus I am using the only figures available. Part of the reason the figures are not available is because a few years ago there was a study into ethnicity and crime in australia( by the AIC) sponsored by the department of Multiculturalism. The study found there was not enough evidence to determine relationships because ethnicity was not collected by the Police forces in different states. One of the obvious recommendations in the report was to begin collecting ethnicity of the accused. However, remarkably this was in the end NOT adopted as the department of Multiculturalism thought this could be too senstive and could lead to divisions in society. So bascially the Politically correct leftists thought we should not be able to find out if migrants are more involved in crime or not. Instead of giving us the truth we are basically not allowed to know. What kind of reasoning is this? In what other sectors of society do we apply such a backward policy? Do we ban Royal Commissions to eliminate the chance someone if found to be at fault? Do we not have enquiries into crashes in case someone is found at fault? Think about it? where else do we have such a policy deliberately trying to obscure the truth.