The government is showing leadership it simply isn't doing what you would like. That isn't a lack of leadership is just a disagreement on strategy.

To bring up Turkey shows you're just not serious, care to recount how well Turkey is going with it's minorities?

In the end the long term solution begins and end in Myanmar.

I can't see how you can say that the Government's actions on this issue are not an example leadership. The country has taken a non-negotiable, no nonsense stand regarding these people.

We've shown other western countries (especially Europe) how to deal with people you don't want. Now that's Leadership!

I'm all for immigration (including refugees) but let's be wise about who we let in. People who are going to be an excessive burden of the tax system and who do not integrate easily into our society shouldn't be let in.

The problem with showing leadership on this issue is that it requires a tacit admission of the ginormous lie we have consistently accustomed the populace to since the Tampa political manipulations - the queue jumpers, economic refugees,etc.

It will take a new national leader, a clean skin or one who still believes in salvation through confession, to take on such a leadership role.

Until then the lie and the hypocrisy about stopping people from drowning at sea will continue until such time as international events smother our role as the last-standing white man in the Far East pontificating on human rights, compassion and generosity to what is in our bones the nowhere near as wealthy or civilised Asians.

That was what happened to the Chinese in Australia. Intensely vilified and persecuted in the C19th as the Yellow Peril, allowed to remain at Federation as tolerated aliens (who would fade away with the White Australia Policy), courtesy of the international dictates of the British Empire,until after WWII during which time they underwent a gradual rehabilitation as honest reliable workers - paving the way for the Colombo Plan in 1951 to bring in a few hundred thousands of Asian students over the following decades(dominated by those of Chinese descent in the White colonies in Asia) to train them (upon their return) as bulwarks against Mao's Red Menace, and in the last 30 years or so for the Chinese to become all right as we get used to the fruits of our immigration policy that focused on the high achieving Asian professionals and/or the monied.

Hopefully with the Rohingya refugees these "second rate Asian nations" might shame us into thinking about what it is to be decent human beings as distinct from the entrenched hairy chested political gladiators - all motivated by the calculus of winning the next Federal elections, at all cost.

Alice, before abusing hard working Australians for not solving the “refugee” problem, an anthropologist should place it in the context of: massive concentrations of wealth and global disparities; geo-political conflicts over strategic resources; endless local wars with displacement of people ( a record 38 million people have been internally displaced due to conflicts around the world, according to a report by the Norwegian Refugee Council-11 million people were newly displaced in 2014); a new report by the UN has revealed that more than 1 in 4 people go hungry in 20 countries around the world- the annual hunger report found that 795 million people globally suffer from malnutrition. Threatening the whole world has been the doubling of population since 1960, with numbers still increasing most in poorest countries. Over the same period, per-capita cropland has fallen by more than half ( just imagine the catastrophe if/when predictions of climate change are realised). But your diatribe is the work of a propagandist, not an anthropologist

Saying no to incompatible People, particularly when Muslim societies are much closer, is leadership!

These Ghettoized people (Trespassing/squatting undocumented Bangladeshi) were rejected by their former host communities for the same incompatibility reason!?

And because that is so, they should be our problem?

I mean it's not like we first offered sanctuary or a service, then withdrew it! We've been upfront from the get go!

Nor have we loaded the unwelcome into rickety old boats and tried to make them someone else economic problem, by just shoving them out to sea!

We have a very generous pro rata refugee intake! Let them line up for that!?

UNHR has agencies in Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia!
Rhrosty.

All people who try to enter countries illegally are the "most unwanted people in the world". This current lot are not the only ones. And the "good news" is that Malaysia and Indonesia will soon be trying to push them off to Australia.

Tony Abbott is doing the right thing in this case by refusing to "show compassion" to yet another horde that thinks other people should solve its problems. Compassion is just another word for the weakness that has already seen far too many inappropriate people living in Australia at our expenses. Compassion is a word used to instil guilt into people. Compassion has been so overdone, overworked by the left wing spoilers that it no longer has any effect, even on rabbit-brained politicians.

And, no Alice, quoting ratbags like Clemintine Ford will have no more effect on Abbott's rightful decision than will your blatherings.

If you don't like our "callous, narrow-minded nation", hop on your bike.

Who says the Rohingya People is Australia's problem? What makes it Australia's problem? Let's get this straight from the start. It's NOT Australia's problem.

As Rhrosty says, these people are squatters from Bangladesh in Myanmar anyway. They have no right to be there & should be shifted back to Bangladesh where they came from.

They have a abhorrent Religion that is totally incompatible with Australia's Lifestyle, Culture & Prevalent Religious practices.

Doubling the number of Islamic adherents in Australia would exponentially increase the problem with terrorists Australia didn't have 20 years ago, not double it.

I feel sorry for them, but its not Australia's problem. Let Turkey take them in if they are that concerned.

If this author wants leadership of & for Muslims she should go back to a Muslim country.

The western world has finally realised, rather belatedly, that Muslims, & especially semi literate Muslims, are a poisonous lot, who have no place in a civilised society.

Perhaps she should join ISIS, they are a progressive Muslim bunch, They probably won't value her as highly as she does herself. I gather the bride price among that lot is about A $10. A bit hard to prove any more value, after they have taken your keyboard, stuck a bag over your head, & belt you seriously, if you speak.

Still they do represent most Muslim values, so she should feel right at home.

Alice drowning at sea is the least of their problems. The talent for self deception and denial of context in all matters found in the bourgeoisie never ceases to amaze and amuse, they'll never understand that people smugglers are gangsters in the style of Joseph Kony's LRA or the Mexican Los Zetas not TV characters like Walter White or Tony Soprano. See that's exactly the problem, bourgeois gadflies like Alice Aslan get all their political views and opinions from TV drama, movies and novels and all their news from authors like Clementine Ford and John Pilger rather than actual journalists.
The people who get involved with such groups or hire them for their services are just as bad as the criminals, what happens to an Australian citizen who hires a member of a !% bike gang to solve a problem and it all ghoes pear shaped? Of course if I hire a bikie and he screws up or rips me off or extorts more money with menaces it's my fault and I'm responsible for not only my own misfortune but in all likelihood the actions of my servant, if a crime ends up being committed. The bourgeois Cat Ladies and White Knights actually don't see boat people as real human beings with agency because they hold them to a much, much lower standard of responsibility for their own actions than they do Whites. Rohingya must certainly know that the gangs are extorting raping and killing their customers because the hostages are forced to phone home with the ransom demands, so there's no excuse at all for getting oneself involved with such brutal operators.

Well I will be the lone dissenter from the rest of the commenters :) The continuing acts of bastardry by Australia in treating refugees badly seems unfortunately well supported

We finally get to the crux of the matter. Those supporting turning back the boats, this supposedly "cruel to be kind" policy was never really about preventing deaths at sea. If that was the case then we would be doing everything we can to help these stateless refugees, including children, who are at risk of dying of thirst, hunger, exposure or drowning at sea.

Instead we have the real reason - we don't want Muslim boat people here. They don't "belong" here.

The so called bleeding hearts have been proved correct. Our policy hasn't stopped the boats, it just turns them back and they go elsewhere. And now other countries are following our lead, and they are now turning their backs on these people. The result isn't pretty.

As the Refugee Council of Australia has pointed out, if the rest of the world followed Australia's lead and changed their laws to prevent asylum seekers who arrive by boat from claiming refugee protection, the international refugee system would collapse. Is that the sort of leadership we want? It seems this is the case.

We have to ask how civilized we really are if we turn our backs on innocent men, women and children who are fleeing persecution, and allow them to die on our doorstep? Are they not human beings? Are some humans more equal than others? Do we believe in universal human rights, or are they only for some people?

It appears our media and government have successfully demonised and dehumanised these people to a majority of Australians. We no longer feel anything when we hear of their distress, except a need to close our ears, minds, hearts and eyes. To feel anything is weakness.

I'm ok Jack - that is all that matters. If anyone feels the need to give a helping hand to boat people, then you are a fool - that is the message I get loud and clear. If you help one boatload of people from drowning, you don't know where it will end! It just encourages them apparently.

You're right Cobber, Rhrosty, thinkabit, Leslie, Jayb, J of M, ttbn and Hasbeen

Tony Abbott got it right, after all.

1. This is because it turned out most of these alleged refugees were not refugees at all, but male, Bangladeshi labourers attempting to exploit concerns about Rohingyas.
Most of these labourers are illiterate. Do you think Australian society would benefit? Note this http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/boatpeople-labourers-not-rohingya-indonesia/story-fn59nm2j-1227366019824

2. Abbott's firm stand encouraged ASEAN countries like Myanmar, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia to act responsibly and accept the minority of genuine Rohingyas. Malaysia and Indonesia are already mainly Muslim so any real refugees would be more at home.

3. Abbott's stand prevented many Rohingyas, instead of being pushed out to sea by other Muslims, from drowning during long voyages.

Well said, BJelly. Very well said indeed.

Those who need to be included on the winning side will always be with us. Some of these sadly feel the need to find someone to kick to fill okay. Better than taking drugs I guess.

We the minority just have to find ways to disabuse the other side of their often self-righteous and inhuman modes of thinking.

VG: Well I will be the lone dissenter from the rest of the commenters :) The continuing acts of bastardry by Australia in treating refugees badly seems unfortunately well supported.

As it should be.

BJelly: As the Refugee Council of Australia has pointed out, if the rest of the world followed Australia's lead and changed their laws to prevent asylum seekers who arrive by boat from claiming refugee protection, the international refugee system would collapse. Is that the sort of leadership we want?

In a word. YES!

BJelly: If you help one boatload of people from drowning, you don't know where it will end! It just encourages them apparently.

Have you only just worked that out. Did you do it by your self or did you need help?

You can't put square pegs in Round holes It just doesn't work. These people do not belong in Australia. Bad Religion, no education, no Western Societal skills. no English. The equivalent of Tribal Bush people. I remember in the 60's when they took the Tribal Aboriginals off the Missions & transplanted them into towns. It took another 20 years for them to assimilate into Western Society & some still haven't. What would we do with these people? We would destroy them. They would not be capable of assimilation into our lifestyle without a huge toll on them & us. That would plainly be cruel.

Not only do they have Islam to contend with they have their own peculiar Ancient Tribal Customs as well.

Do-gooders sipping on their Latte's in Melbourne are imagining that everyone lives just like them. These people just don't.

Jayb - I prefer a flat white thanks.

As far as we know we are living on the only planet in the billions of galaxies in the infinite vastness of space that has life.

How precious is each an every life? I know my life is precious to me, and that is true for most people.

We forget how special life is. Dehumanising others allows us to turn our backs on people in need.

Fear and hate are powerful forces. They can be used to divide us and keep us squabbling between ourselves. We forget our common humanity, and how precious each life is.

PJelly: Fear and hate are powerful forces. They can be used to divide us and keep us squabbling between ourselves. We forget our common humanity, and how precious each life is.

You are talking to the converted here. What you have to do is talk to the moslems. They need convincing. Good luck with that.

Jayb,
I have friends who are Muslim, I work with people who are Muslim. They are good people. We should judge people by their actions, and their character.

Most of us are born into the religion we follow - tradition is very powerful. We forget that Muslims , Jews and Christians all follow the Old Testament - they are Abrahamic religions - Allah, God, Yaweh - are all the same God. Weird huh?

Muslims make up 2% of our population. It is easy to make people afraid of people they don't know. They look different and a bit scary so it's not too hard to make them into the boogeyman.

I am no fan of fundamentalist Muslims,(or any extremists) who thrive on hate and use violence against innocents. But most Muslims aren't fundamentalists - they are normal people.

BJelly: Muslims make up 2% of our population.

2% of the population, & look at the trouble were are having with them that we didn't have 20 years ago. Any increase this percentage will see an increase in the problems exponentially.

BJ: It is easy to make people afraid of people they don't know.

That was true 20 years ago. Now people know what a dangerous Religion is practiced by these people & have every right to be afraid.

BJ: They look different and a bit scary so it's not too hard to make them into the bogeyman.

It is not Australians that have made them into the bogeyman They have done this themselves even the "nice" ones. Even the nice ones have created havoc in peaceful Western Countries throughout the World with a moslem population over 2%.

BJ: But most Muslims aren't fundamentalists - they are normal people.

Even the "most moslems" hate unbelievers even though they aren't fundamentalists, their Koran tells them to wheather they like it or not. When these moderate people are eventually given a choice between protecting their religious beliefs or protecting non-believers. Where do you think their loyalties will lay

I wonder when these "progressives" will start looking at the problems in these countries, such as over-population, backward institutions, medieval mindset etc? I know these "progressives" love lecturing us on accepting asylum seekers, but they have little idea on how to correct these countries. Criticizing non-white countries isn't trendy enough and is considered racist. So when a conservative-leaning person offers solutions it's considered racist, imperialist, colonialist, oppressive etc. Well done, lefties.

By the way, Ms Aslan, how are the Syrian refugees who migrated to Turkey recently going these days? Not too well, I can tell you. They're begging on the street, living in share houses (up to 17 in one house), and violently getting driven out of neighbourhoods by the local Turks. I am living in Turkey at the moment so I see it all. Perhaps you would be better off lecturing your other half.

Even the "most moslems" hate unbelievers even though they aren't fundamentalists, their Koran tells them to wheather they like it or not. When these moderate people are eventually given a choice between protecting their religious beliefs or protecting non-believers. Where do you think their loyalties will lay

Jayb,
There have been cases where ASIO has depended on tip offs from the Muslim community about radicalized Muslims. So moderate Muslims can and will assist us against fundamentalist Muslims.

BJelly,, there is no point arguing with all the usual anti-everyone-who-is-different-than-me suspects on this forum.
They are all frightened of the big bad Muslims who live in Australia.

I am frightened at what we are becoming in the eyes of the rest of the world.
Australia needs to take its share of the current Rohingya refugees, just like we took in the Vietnamese boat people.

I wouldn't mind betting most of the above whinging posters were all out gnashing their teeth and beating their chests when those boat people needed help too.
Amazingly, we were not overrun by Communists/terrorists then either....

BJelly, that's a chicken and egg argument, if there were no Muslims here there would be no Muslim terror and as we've said time and time again the issue of Islamic extremism is only one tiny part of the problem, people from societies where Islam is the dominant religion are incompatible with societies where it's not.
The Police claim to have received assistance from the Muslim community, it doesn't mean that it actually happened, the state Police, ASIO and Federal Police are all heavily politicised if not outright political organisations, how many times have we seen them lie and omit information on this issue? They lie about the seriousness of the threat, they lie about the prevalence of such views among Muslims, lie about Islam outright,the stated goals of the new Victorian chief commissioner are to tackle domestic violence and community cohesion, both political issues.

Suse,

We were not over run by Communism when we took in the Vietnamese, possibly because they were fleeing Communism but we did get a fair share of criminals and the turning of at least one Sydney suburb into a ghetto that was /is known as Vietnamatta (Cabramatta).

Refugees who are Muslim are not fleeing Islam, they are bringing it with them.

I think the Government should use the massive, new student accommodation at Sydney Uni in the Newtown area (paid for with money for the poor) to house Muslim "refugees". It could be instructive.

Hi Jay of Melbourne,

You are right about things not being as they seem, but it is bigger than you think. The US and Saudis are behind Islamic Fundamentalism. It sounds shocking, but stay with me.

The Saudis are our closest Arab allies. The US and UK sell them $billions of weapons. After the oil shocks of the 1970s, we came to an agreement. They agreed to give the West a secure supply of oil. We promised to keep them in power - the house of Saud is an absolute monarchy with an appalling human rights record. No sign of democracy here.

The Saudis just happen to follow a fundamentalist version of Islam - Wahhabism/Salafism, and they spend much of their wealth spreading its teachings around the globe. Salafis believe in offensive jihad and spreading Sharia law.

We have been supporting Islamic fundamentalism for a long time. Google Operation Cyclone - where the CIA backed the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan.

More recently the US and Saudis have been backing Al Qaeda in Libya, Al Nusra Front (Al Qaeda) in Syria to get rid of Gaddafi and Assad (both secular regimes - they kept Al Qaeda out until we invaded).

Judicial Watch recently published formerly classified documents from the U.S. Department of Defense and State Department, which show the US is supporting ISIS. I know it is hard to believe, but Google it.

It starts to make sense when you realise the George H Bush was a former Director of the CIA and an oil billionaire with close ties to the Saudis including the Bin Laden family - google Bush and the Carlyle Group. Dick Cheney was CEO of Halliburton before becoming VP. The revolving door between government, CIA, and corporations is called the corporatocracy - they are the only ones winning in this war on terror. They play both sides - it's good for business.

The fact that the fear of Islamic terrorism has allowed them to take away our freedoms and right to privacy is just an added bonus.

They care as much about us as we do about refugees.

Don't you just love it when a Chinese like Mr Chek calls white Australians "racist?

Hey Chek, I would not say that your own people are the most racist in the world, but they are making a grab for the coveted title. Chinese pontificating about racism to Australians is like Nazis lecturing to us about racism.

The Chinese may believe in evolution and that humans are descended from apes, but they do not believe that they are descended from black Africans. They claim that unlike then rest of humanity, the Chinese evolved spontaneously within China, and that is the official Chinese government position which is taught in Chinese schools. The Chinese still have "miscegenation" laws banning Chinese from having sexual relations with blacks. They don't want their pure race polluted with African blood. The Chinese are famous for creating Chinese only Ghettoes everywhere in the world. The Chinese only want to live with Chinese. White Europeans are a bit the same way only nowhere near as racist as the Chinese, and that was why European Australia had a White Australia Policy. Chinese calling the kettle black? Up yours.

So, when are your cashed up Chinese relatives going to show some "leadership" and accept a few boatloads of these mostly Bangladeshi labourers looking for a job? The answer is never. To begin with, the Bangladeshis are too black for the Chinese, and they are Muslims. The Chinese are not as stupid as westerners in importing Muslims, they have enough trouble with the ones they already have. Although, being a smart race, they are a lot more practical than wimpy Europeans when it comes to dealing with troublesome Muslim minorities. They just shoot them, dilute them through immigration, and breed them out.

Of course, your little speech will go over well with the likes of Susieonline, Plantagenet, and BJelly. These western self loathers have a compulsive desire to be moral puritans who are a cut above the rest of the whites in Australia. They are the very "pontificating Australians" that you sneer at, and they are the ones that agree with you.

Lego "Of course, your little speech will go over well with the likes of Susieonline, Plantagenet, and BJelly. These western self loathers have a compulsive desire to be moral puritans who are a cut above the rest of the whites in Australia"

Thank goodness you didn't lump me in with the charming Jay of Melbourne, JayB, Runner and Hasbeen, as that would have really upset this 'moral puritan'...

Not content to bag every Muslim on the planet, you are slagging off the Chinese now?
Wow, you must have a very low opinion of yourself if you need to put down every other different person to you to feel big about yourself?

Re your last stupid post, BJelly.

Almost everything you wrote is perfectly true. The Saudis are not our friends, they are our enemies. The problem which your deplorable lack of intellect is unable to focus upon, is that any alternative government in Arabia will almost certainly be a lot worse than the Saudis. The Saudis want to rot Europe out with Muslim immigration, and people like yourself want to help them because your humanitarian ideals make you suckers for Islamic domination. And as the custodians of Mecca, the Saudis can hardly become liberal democracies, can they? But ISIS are a lot worse, they want to declare jihad on the whole western world, right now.

The Saudis have done a deal with Al Qaida, leave us alone and go and Jihad the infidels somewhere else, and we will slip you a few bob. But I don't think the boys in ISIS are going to play the same game.

ISIS in control of Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq and half of the entire world's oil supplies? Use your brains for once and think beyond your ideological blinkers.

C'mon mate, you can do it. Focus. Concentrate.

Hi LEGO,
I think you mistake me for someone who likes fundamentalist Islam. I don't.

I deplore anyone who thinks their ideology/religion is more important than people and life on this planet.

I am all for stopping the spread of Wahhabism, I wish our political leaders felt the same, but it serves their purposes.

Islamic fundamentalists make useful foot-soldiers. They will fight to the death. They keep us scared and confused so our political masters can keep us in a perpetual state of war. This means money for their corporations which just happen to specialise in armaments, private security, private prisons and construction. Those no-bid pentagon contracts are big business.

If we have the sense not to distance ourselves from others because of race, religion, etc, we can find people of good will who can help stop the spread of Whahabi Islam, including moderate Islamists who also suffer from this conflict - as we know more Muslims have been killed by Muslims in this war on terror, than us Westerners.

The 1% run the world. They already have everything they could possiblly want, but they want more. They want it all. They want to control us. That is where those handy anti-terror laws and mass surveillance laws that strip us of our legal protections like the presumption of innocence and ditching habeas corpus are so good for them.

As corny as it sounds only by loving one another and breaking the cycle of violence will it stop. We need to be the change we want to see in the world. This means caring for each other - especially the most vulnerable. Be willing to sacrifice for one another.

But that isn't part of our dog eat dog ideology that is so popular these days. If they can keep us divided they will win. We can change things if we can work together and reject their world view.

Hate and fear are winning at the moment, so our chances are slim at best.

Onya LEGO, never let a chance to kick someone when they're down pass you by.

What a guy!

Islamisation of the globe is a far bigger threat over the next 100 years than climate change could ever be.

As Islam spreads into the Western world, as currently seen throughout Europe and the UK, democracy, the western values, western life styles, and freedoms are all challenged and criticised. Western countries have bent over backward helping these people with no thanks or appreciation. Unless the West stops the influx it's only a matter of time before the scales are tipped and the proverbial really starts to hit the fan.

The UK is the proof it only takes a 5% Muslim population to have a serious negative impact.

Sad as it is for the individual families involved, these Muslim boat migrants need to be sent home regardless of the consequences they face.

The Saudis will be alright. They have nothing to fear from ISIS. They are the ones funding ISIS. The Saudis have a huge military and can depend on the UK and US to defend them if things ever got out of hand. They are happy to let ISIS lose on their rivals - Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Libya etc. ISIS are our beserker army.

Check out this story - General Jonathan Shaw, Britain's former Assistant Chief of the Defence Staff, says Qatar and Saudi Arabia responsible for spread of radical Islam

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11140860/Qatar-and-Saudi-Arabia-have-ignited-time-bomb-by-funding-global-spread-of-radical-Islam.html

They knew going into Iraq would turn it into a failed state. Just like they did in Libya and now Syria. That was what they want. Everywhere our forces go Al Qaeda and ISIS turn up - Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria, and Yemen. We are destabilising the Middle East. Why is that?

Here is a Mr Dick Cheney in 1994 describing why invading Iraq would lead to chaos in the first Gulf war, I wish he had spoken to the VP in the Bush Jnr administration in 2003 - oh, that's right he's the same guy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EstVJo6URdQ

The US have the biggest military in the globe which spends as much on it's military as the next dozen countries combined - think about that - more than all it's military rivals and some of its allies combined.

We have been at war the entire 21st century and yet terrorism is getting worse not better.

Is it possible that our masters are saying one thing to us to get support for their wars and so called counter-terrorism measures, but leave their real aims unspoken?

Those wars that we fight over there so we don't fight them here are causing human suffering on a scale we can't even imagine. Our "war on terror" is terrorising millions of people and is one of the reasons behind the massive increase in refugees. That is why we owe refugees (especially ones fleeing from the war on terror) safety when they escape the hell we unleashed on them.

Hi LEGO and Conservative Hippy,

The Saudis support the most extreme version of Islam on the planet - Wahabism - they are the ones who are spreading militant jihad and sharia law. If we really want to stop fundamentalist Islam we must break all ties with Saudi Arabia, and it's close allies of Qatar and Kuwait.

But the Saudis have close ties with the British government and Royal family. The Saudies have close business ties with Republican and Democrat leadership in the US.

Zbigniew Brzezinski is the mastermind behind the CIA support of the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan and today he is Obama's top adviser. This is what he had to say about supporting Fundamentalist Muslims in the light of the 9/11 attacks. This might give you some insight into how our masters view current events.

"Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic [integrisme], having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

Brzezinski: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated: Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.

Brzezinski: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn’t a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries."

They would rather see the defeat of leftist regimes, and will happily use militant islam to do it. They aren't afraid of Muslims, they are afraid of anything that threatens capitalism.

To combat Terrorism we need to end support for Saudi Arabia
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/aug/31/combat-terror-end-support-saudi-arabia-dictatorships-fundamentalism

I could support that, could you?

Im not fussed about Abbot but I dont think Australia deserves the bagging its getting. The failure in leadership actually lies with the leader in Mayanmar. Populated mostly by 'radical Buddhists' (didnt know there was such a thing) who have condemned and ultimately 'denied citizenship of the Muslim minority', resulting in thousands fleeing their home land. Its such a shame that religion causes such destruction and creates such evil hatred, that people of the same nationality become mortal enemies. That Government is responsible for their citizens, promoting and encouraging unity and community. Achieving this shows great leadership and the ability to run a country. There ends the blame game.

To Susieoncrack

I'll take Hasbeen, Jay, JayB and Runner (you forgot Spindoc and Loudmouth) every time on my team. I am just so glad that Onjab, Arjay, DavidF, Imajulianutter, Craig Minns, James O'Neill, and BJelly are on your team. What some of these characters say must make even you wince. The only one on your team who had a brain was Killarney.

Everything I wrote about Chinese racism was completely true. I am sorry if the truth hurts your ears. A Chinese journalist named Sang Yee wrote a book about the Chinese who are immigrating to Australia called "The Year The Dragon Came." In it, he interviewed a dozen Chinese families and asked them about their experiences in living in Australia. All of them were like Mr Chek, they had nothing but contempt for white Australians like yourself who they called "guizi" (foreign devils.)

Mr Chek is an Asian, probably a Chinese. He has decided that his own country is no good, and has come to your country, which is better. Where he proceeds to dump on your own people. And you don't see anything wrong with that? What is wrong with you? Did your parents not bring you up right? When you attended ANZAC Day services at school, where among other lost soldiers we remembered those Australians who died in the Pacific War to stop Australia being dominated by Asians, did you pay any attention? Perhaps you went to uni where the fashion to dump on your own became so reflexive that you do it now automatically without even the need to think about it?

Well think about this. The Chinese in particular are nationalistic and racist to the point of xenophobia towards any person who is not a Chinese. It must absolutely astound them that white people like yourself routinely dump on your own people, and even defend Asians who do the same. But they are so happy that you do. It reinforces their own xenophobia that they are a special race who are the victims of whitey

Oh gawd, there goes LEGO Mitty again...

Pocketa pocketa pocketa...

Hmmmm, is what LEGO says true or false?

Should the messenger be attacked or the message?

What LEGO says is almost always entirely the product of a one-sided view that doesn't have any balance and is therefore able to be readily ignored.

On rare occasions there is something worth responding to, but that's more due to accident than intent.

The messenger is the medium that transmits the message. Sometimes the medium is so full of noise that there is no way of retrieving a useful message.

LEGO is just such a messenger.

Hi LEGO,

So we both agree fundamentalist Islam is a problem, and I think we both agree that the Saudis have been instrumental in spreading Wahhabism around the globe.

Do you think that we should try to stop Saudi funding of Terror? If so how should we do this?

If we could stop the Saudis funding Islamic Terrorism it help solve much of the refugee crisis. Many refugees are fleeing the war on terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria etc.

Secret Pentagon Report Reveals US "Created" ISIS As A "Tool" To Overthrow Syria's President Assad
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-05-23/secret-pentagon-report-reveals-us-created-isis-tool-overthrow-syrias-president-assad

Saudis Largest Source of Terror Funds
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/wikileaks-saudis-largest-source-of-terror-funds/

Documents Back Saudi link to Extremists
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/world/middleeast/24saudi.html

The discussion has veered way off topic. The article itself was about bad old Australia having the cheek to decide that we have had it with illegal immigrants.

Now, though, we have people carrying on about racism; whose 'team' someone is on; how many Muslims someone knows, and how nice those Muslims are; people who disagree with other posters saying they (others) are 'one sided'; we are not civilized because of our attitude to illegals; reference to 'anti-everyone-who-is different, and so on. All irrelevant and point-scoring twaddle to satisfy individual egos.

Argument is healthy in a democracy. It can only happen in a democracy. What has happened here is not healthy, and it leads to the exit. All we are doing is arguing among ourselves, and entertaining the writer of another anti-Australian diatribe by one of the usual suspects. I think we all need to be a little more discerning about what we read and what comments we make. We are all Australians, and while we do not need to adopt the attitude that we are always right, we should, at least, have enough self-respect to deny the sneering denigration of our country by extremists, like Alice Aslan, John Pilger and others. I, for one, willl be putting Ms. Aslan on my no-no list, with Pilger and the ex-diplomat, whose name I cannot bring to mind at the moment.

There is no shame in defending your country against people who have the ear of the general public (which you don't). Some of them are not even Australian, and Pilger hasn't lived here for years. It's not a matter of my country right or wrong. It's a matter of respect and what we can achieve by polite debate and not thinking that we alone know everything.

ttbn, emigration of any kind is driven by the perception of the emigrant that there is a better life to be had if they go from where they are to somewhere else. Australians emigrate too, but nobody suggests that an Australian seeking to make more money in some other part of the world should be prevented from doing so because they are an "economic migrant".

The simple fact is that the vast majority of people don't seek to migrate and when there is a large amount of movement from any part of the world it is always driven by conditions becoming sufficiently intolerable that it overcomes the resistance of people to movement from their familiar areas.

the only possible way to prevent immigration from constantly being raised as an issue for Australian politicians and rabble-rousers to make noise about is to ensure that conditions remain tolerable for most people wherever they happen to be at any time.

If we can manage that, then we won't have people willing to risk death by drowning to seek greener pastures. Instead, everyone will be "economic migrants" of the sort that every country in the world would like to attract.

Terribly sad for some of the more biggotted among us, but a win for everyone else.

No, we do not agree, BJelly.

Fundamentalist Islam is not the problem, Islam itself is the problem. You are trying to say that there are "fundamentalist" Muslims who are the problem, and "moderate" Muslims who are not.

Please define a "moderate" Muslim? Who are their leaders, and what do they stand for? If they do not believe that state and religion is inseparable, and that Koranic law over rides civil law, they are not Muslims.

Would you like me to do it for you? "Fundamentalist" Muslims take the Koran seriously and do exactly what it says, which is that Islam must dominate, it can be spread by violence, and they are willing to fight for their religion because they know that it makes them the highest grade of Muslim that will surely get eternal life.

"Moderate" Muslims believe exactly the same thing, they just don't want to be Jihadis and kill for Allah. But they can't criticise the ones who do because Allah has decreed that Jihadis who spill blood for Islam are the best Muslims there are. They prefer to just sit back and cheer on the Jihadis from their lounge rooms. They are not part of the solution, they are part of the problem.

If most Muslims are "moderate", why is almost every Muslim country on planet Earth a medieval cesspit of violence, and the more Muslim it is, the worse it is

Money taken from the Australian taxpayer and money denied to Age Pensioners and other vulnerable categories should NOT be spent on fools' errands setting up Australia as the nagging moral policeman and rescuer (whether those other sovereign countries seek it or not, but likely NOT!) locally and especially not in far flung regions of the World.

What is happening here is very plain to see. It is the political 'Progressives' who have hijacked Labor endeavoring to prove that they have superior values to all comers. They choose such subjects as 'asylum seekers' and gay marriage. However they are NOT interested in resolving the problems of 'Struggle Street'. Apart from allocating the blame to 'Class' and 'gender', they would have no nothing to say anyway. It is all Marxist-inspired rhetoric, 'dissing' everyone who is trying to be constructive, and stirring.

They have NO policies and NO practical solutions to the problems confronting their home country, Australia, but there they are posing and strutting their assumed higher moral 'values'(sic) proposing the impossible and ludicrous, unaware and not caring about the negative consequences of their superior 'humanitarianism'. At the same time their totalitarian international socialism is the very opposite of freedom, humanism and self-determination.

tbc..

contd..

'Progressivism' is also the hidden editorial policy behind the leftist ABC and the social commentators it prefers and gives a podium, many who have been so long with the ABC, since well back in the previous Millenium, for their 'contracting' to be regarded by some as sinecures instead. The ABC needs new blood.

Previous Labor leader Mark Latham got it right when he recently observed,

"FORMER Labor leader Mark Latham has slammed his party’s “obsession” with gay marriage [and I would add 'asylum seekers'] saying it should focus on the nation’s “Struggle Streets” instead.
He told 3AW radio Bill Shorten’s private members bill to push for changes to the marriage act to allow same-sex couples to tie the knot, to be introduced into parliament on Monday, was nothing more than a symbolic gesture.
He said the biggest social issue facing Australia was unemployment, drug use and homelessness in suburbs such as Mt Druitt which was the focus of the SBS documentary, Struggle Street."
http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/former-labor-leader-mark-latham-slams-labor-over-gay-marriage/story-fnizhakg-1227371979220

The 'Progressives' are always full of rhetoric and it is always someone else who has to pay. Fix your own backyard first, Progressives.
Charity starts at home, with commonsense, practical solutions.

"Rabble rousers" being those who don't share your particular bigotries, Craig?

Which "bigotries" do you think I have, ttbn? I'd be fascinated to find out.

And to save you the trouble of asking someone to look it up for you, I thought I'd give you the Webster definition of a rabble-rouser.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rabble-rouser
"a person who makes a group of people angry, excited, or violent (such as by giving speeches) especially in order to achieve a political or social goal"

alternatively

"one that stirs up (as to hatred or violence) the masses of the people".

Here's another one:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gutless+wonder

"A totally insipid and spineless person"

For example, a rabble-rouser that hides behind anonymity might be described as a gutless wonder.

Hi Lego,

OK so you aren't going to touch the question of what do we do about the spread of Wahhabism. You want to paint all Muslims as fundamentalists in sheep's clothing.

I think you have come up with your own definition of what a "real" Muslim believes. And I'm not sure anything I say will change that.

There are obviously many thousands of moderate Muslims who have chosen to live in Australia and are happy to live by our laws and live amongst us in peace. Otherwise our prisons would be filled with Muslims who have broken our laws. Muslims have been in Australia since the settler days - the Afghan cameleers were instrumental in opening up the interior. Many prominent Australians are Muslim, even a Federal member of Parliament, Ed Husic is Muslim. Moderate Muslims have been instrumental in alerting ASIO to radicalised Muslims. I don't know what else they have to do to prove to you they are law abiding citizens who deserve to live in peace.

There are no doubt Muslims who want to change our laws, but there are also fundamentalist Christians who want to change our laws.

At the moment we have a Prime Minister and some members of his government who want to turn their backs on 800 years of the Magna Carta (the 800th anniversary is on 15 June) which enshrined some principles of law that were considered to be foundational only a few years ago, such as: the presumption of innocence, the right to know of charges laid against you, due process, equality under the law, and habeus corpus. Since the war on terror, these are no longer absolute values in our legal system.

Magna Carta: 800 years on
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/23/magna-carta-new-peoples-charter

Here are some examples of Muslim leaders denouncing terrorism and violence
http://www.crikey.com.au/2015/02/24/an-informative-but-incomplete-reminder-of-muslim-leaders-speaking-up-clearly/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

Here is a Muslim lawyer answering a question about whether Muslims should follow laws in Australia
http://tgb.com.au/blog/can-muslims-live-australian-laws

Craig,

Some of your definitions look suss, but in these days of language bastardisation, and so many 'experts' taking the liberty of doing what they will, it is possible to find definitions of any word to suit your purpose. Me - I'm and old traditionist. My Collins Concise Australian says: "a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race".

Now, I have no stand on anyone's religion, politics or race - I have no religion of my own (except that I had a childhood introduction to the Christian creed); I think people are entitled to their own political beliefs, and race is what it is - people can't change that, it's the how they were born, and I would never discriminate against anyone because of their race.

Now, in case we have forgotten, we are talking about illegal arrivals. I am against them. No exceptions. So I don't think I could be called a bigot when it comes illegal immigration. I also have no problem at all with your opposite opinion as to illegal immigration. I think you are wrong, uninformed, whatever, but of course, I recognise your right to hold any opinion you wish.

You are the one who used the word 'bigot' initially, old son. I just tossed it back to you. You can't expect to call people nasty names without a reaction, and you gave the impression that anyone who didn't agree with you is a bigot.

Hi Lego,

In what way are all Muslim countries medieval? Even though Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE - practice some of the most fundamentalist forms of Islam, even you would have to admit they are very modern as far as urban architecture goes. Dubai, Abu Dhabi,Doha are all stunning ultra-modern cities that could rival places like London, New York and Tokyo.

Places like Iraq and Libya used to be very wealthy and were more secular - they were places where women had rights, infant mortality was low, and where education rates were very high before we bombed them, now they are failed states. So now they are looking more medieval, but that isn't their fault - we've bombed them into the middle ages.

Some Muslim countries are very poor - no question, but not all poor countries are Muslim.
5 poorest countries
The Congo - 90% Christian
Zimbabwe - 80% Christian
Burudi - 80-90% Christian
Liberia - 85% Christian
Eritrea - 50% Muslim, 50% Christian

5 Richest Countries
Qatar - 67% Muslim
Luxemborg - 80% Christian
Singapore - 33% Buddhist
Norway - 85% Christian
Brunei - Muslim

I think you can see being a Muslim country doesn't mean they are the most backward at least in terms of GDP.

When you come back at me with a post like that, BJelly, I have to ask myself is, "Is BJelly dumb? Or is he being devious.?" I think it is a bit of both.

You know I am not talking about bloody architecture. And you know that the only reason why some Muslim countries are prosperous is because they are floating on an ocean of oil. Socially, their cultural practices are medieval with almost no regard whatsoever for your precious Human Rights. Only one is a democracy, three other "democracies" (Malaysia, Egypt and Turkey) are reverting to type, with either dictators or military juntas running the place.

Now, I will see if I can break through your incredible mindset with a bit of logic.

How is it that you can understand that Nazis and Ku Klux Klansmen are people that you think are dangerous and despicable, because they hold beliefs that you find objectionable, yet you give Muslims a free pass? Does your mind just register Muslims as a "religion" and "minorities", your brain shorts out your critical analysis circuit, and you judge Muslims by a different standard to Nazis and Klansmen?

If you think that the majority of Muslims are nice people and it is just a few hotheads that give all Muslims a bad name, do you judge Nazis and Klansmen by the same standard? After all, very few Germans were involved in putting millions into gas chambers, most of them just yelled "Sieg Heil" and supported Hitler. At one time, two million US citizens were members of the Ku Klux Klan, but only a very tiny minority were involved in lynching's, bombings, and the burning of negro churches.

I find it incredible that a person like yourself refuses to see the danger in a religion which openly preaches violence in it's own holy book, and who's own God commands the murder of non members, homosexuals, apostates, and anybody who dares to criticise their religion

Hi Lego,
Because I don't go looking for the absolute worst in the religion and say that is what all Muslims really believe like you do.

I look at history and see that Muslims have mostly lived in peace with others.

Don't get me wrong I think we must stop Wahabism - that is the type of Islam you and I both fear. It is the one that likes to chop people's heads off, impose Sharia law and dominate non-Muslim countries. But I don't go about presuming that is the version of Islam practiced in most Muslim countries because it isn't.

Many Muslim leaders do their best to keep those nutjobs out of their countries.

Unfortunately our leaders have been turning a blind eye to this particularly nasty version of Islam that radicalises moderate Muslims because those that spread it are

a) sitting on the world's biggest oil reserves and they are in no hurry to move away from oil as many are in the oil industry (Bush familiy, Royal Dutch Shell, British Petroleum) - that suits them just fine. Money is more important to them.

b) Having these crazy Islamists is quite handy when you want to distabilize an area that has resisted opening their economies to the West. People don't matter - money does. See Operation Condor.

c) Having a bogeyman is quite handy if you want to control your population - add a bit of fear and hate - divide and conquer is an old tactic - this democracy thing is getting a bit tiresome. The war on terror has given so called liberal democracies across the globe the opportunity to bring in draconian laws that severely restrict our rights and freedoms. Australia and many other western democracies are now turnkey totalitarian states. We have turned our backs on our own so called values with barely a whimper. People don't matter, power over them does.

My bad, I meant to say Operation Cyclone - the one where the CIA funded the Mujaheddin in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets in the 1980s

Here's a clip of Zbiginiew Brzezinski giving a pep talk to the Mujaheddin in the late 1970s - he wanted to arm them in secret without revealing America's role. Also includes a pic of him with Osama Bin Laden in the good old days.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJTv2nFjMBk

It is so awkward when the West's old buddies like Bin Laden in Afghanistan and Saddam Hussein who they helped get chemical weapons to fight the Iranians, keep going rogue.

"The CIA had already warned that Iraq was using chemical weapons almost daily. But Mr Rumsfeld, at the time a successful executive in the pharmaceuticals industry, still made it possible for Saddam to buy supplies from American firms."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-153210/Rumsfeld-helped-Iraq-chemical-weapons.html

Honestly it is so bad, it is hard to believe it, but it's from their own declassified documents.

Operation Condor was the CIA backed campaign of political repression and state terror involving intelligence operations and assassination of opponents, officially implemented in 1975 by the right-wing dictatorships of the Southern Cone of South America.

While I'm here I'll add a bit I found about Iraqi's comparing Iraq before and after the War.
http://www.quora.com/Iraq/Is-Iraq-a-better-place-or-worse-to-live-since-the-fall-of-Saddam-Hussein
It might help explain why so many Iraqis became refugees after we "liberated" them.

Before you think I'm anti American - I am not. I love American culture and it's people. It is the hypocrisy and mendacity of the US government I dislike. The US is no longer a democratic republic, it is an oligarchy.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/21/americas-oligarchy-not-democracy-or-republic-unive/

To BJelly

According to your history books, "Muslims have mostly lived in peace with others."

You have obviously never picked up a history book in your life. Where do you get your info? The Green/Left Weekly?

Hi Lego - yeah I could have said that better - Muslims, have killed millions of people, but so have Christians and Atheists. Muslims certainly aren't any more warlike than anyone else.