I believe that some people probably tell themselves that terrorists are 'lone wolves’, or that the likes of Tarrant in New Zealand are not representative of the broader community because they cannot face the fact Fraser Anning and Tarrant do, in fact, represent many people who, while not outspoken or violent themselves, thoroughly approve of outspoken or violent people doing the business for them. As in 'all Muslims are not terrorists’, where nobody has the slightest idea how many non-terrorist Muslims approve of terrorism by other people, so to it is with non-Muslims, tacitly approving of retaliatory violence. They are just not going to say it out loud, particularly now that freedom of speech has been been blocked by Left extremists and even by run of the mill politicians like our Prime Minister and Immigration Minister, both frightened of people who say what they think.

I don't remember Jack Nicholson's exact words in the Court Martial scene, but too many Westerners 'can't handle the truth’

There are many of us who don't believe that sword-wielding Islam and Christianity are able to cohabit in peace!? And resent the spread of this alien culture by deceit and trespass. As occurred wherever Islam has spread? These are my honestly held views!

Neither do many Muslims, who would appear to be the prime target of these, our way or death, sword welding Muslim miscreants?

That said, there's no place in civil society for hate speech and the incitement to violence! The purpose and outcome of hate speech!?

Targeting people in prayer is beneath contempt, qualification or justification!

This creature should be locked away in solitary confinement and the key thrown away, for the term of his natural life!

And that Senator (with just 19 primary votes) should be excused from the house indefinitely, pending elections. And Just not given any oxygen by the equally hostile Murdoch media/right-wing shock jocks!

These imbeciles need to wake up to themselves and stop being tools for fools!
Alan B.

Dear Alan B.

This is how a man who is not a cowardly thug responds to an egging;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zw97LIBGbR4&feature=youtu.be&t=90

Our pathetic senator is openly relating what he did to the teenager to what the diggers did in the trenches.

The man is such an utter embarrassment.

Steele,

Anyone, no matter whom, if hit with an egg or any other sticky substance, has every right to hit back in self defence.

Anning's attacker was rightly wrestled to the deck, any other action would have been stupidity.

SteeleRedux What about the one who threw the egg at Gillard WA police charged him, Victoria police like low crime statistics did not charge the little gutless wannabe social media celebrity.

SteeleRedux You may have egg on your face have not seen it yet but apparently there are more videos, to quote a description of one from someone who has seen it.

"Try all the videos, they took heaps of them and only edited some of them. You'll see one view from behind the violent assailant after he is slapped where he steps forward and punches Anning with a hard straight right to the chest thereby assaulting Anning a second time after the initial clandestine assault to his head. But this time as the instigator he is undoubtedly culpable and has now committed an assault and battery.
He made no attempt to withdraw after the egging to Anning's head,in fact he poked his phone in Anning's face as he stepped in and threw that punch."

Philip S,

What an utter load of tripe. This gutless wonder who you idolise so much turned around, saw a teenager of slight build and then and only then reacted with a swing at his face. This little chap didn't even come up to his shoulder.

And to claim that it was the teenager who punched the piece of garbage back "with a hard straight right to the chest" is just inane. He did no such thing. The reason the cowardly piece of garbage fell backwards was because of the guy in the check shirt trying to stop him assaulting a boy.

Do you really think the piece of garbage was really reacting like the 'diggers in the trenches' because I certainly hope not. i imagine they would have laughed like Arnie did.

Although you possibly don't have that high opinion of our diggers if you think the comparison is warranted.

yep when Gillard was egged the man was arrested. When its someone from the right the idiotic left call for the silly little kid to become the victim. Anning was right. His parents should be ashamed but I doubt he has ever had a smacked bum in his life.

SteeleRedux How ignorant can you get quote "And to claim that it was the teenager who punched the piece of garbage back"

The only thing I claimed was there were other videos, which I stated I had not seen and the description of what happened came from someone who had seen it.

So on the side you are suggesting that it is okay for anyone to hit another person just as long as they are smaller than the person they are going to hit and expect there to be no consequences.

Assault is assault does not matter if it was a 90yo grandmother doing the hitting, it is still a criminal offense.

Also quote "This gutless wonder who you idolise so much"
** Can you show me the words that made you arrive at that conclusion? Or are you doing your usual caper reading something into something that is not there, in other words making up stories. **

Quote "Although you possibly don't have that high opinion of our diggers if you think the comparison is warranted."

** I have made no reference to or any implied reference to "our Diggers", so what the hell are you rambling on about. **

Please re-read what you write before posting so as not to prove to other that you often show signs of senility.

Philip S,

Well this should be pretty easy, put up the source of your quote and let's have a look at it. As to you not seeing the multiple video angles a quick google search would find many of them. Why didn't you do it to confirm how idiotic your quote was? Simple, evidence is so bloody inconvenient for the likes of you isn't it.

It seems you want everything spoon fed to you.

Here is the piece of garbage's quote about diggers;

"When somebody cracks you in the back of your head, you react and defend yourself. That for years is what Australians have been doing, luckily they did that in the trenches otherwise we'd be all speaking German now probably."

So slapping and punching a boy half his size equates him in his mind with our ANZACs.

And you would be right on board with this defending him.

SteeleRedux It is apparent you have an overinflated view of yourself.

Lets analyze your comment, bit hard as you attribute words to people who don't say or use them, but here we go.

1st you come and lie by saying "This gutless wonder who you idolise so much" I did not say anything like that.

I asked you to show me the words that made you arrive at that conclusion - Like usual you can't provide anything to back that statement up. So you totally ignore it.

2nd You ramble on about "the 'diggers in the trenches'"

I ask you what you are rambling on about as I have made no comments about "our diggers" - Again like usual you come back with a nonsensical rant about ANZACS and this quote "Here is the piece of garbage's quote about diggers;"

What part of I have made no reference to or any implied reference to "our Diggers", don't you understand.
Trying to attribute someone else's statement to me demonstrates how stupid you are. Anyone reading above will see I made no such comments.

Countering the rubbish coming from you SteeleRedux, does not mean I agree or disagree with what another person says, except in your delusional mind.

As for your glee at this "Well this should be pretty easy, put up the source of your quote and let's have a look at it."

** Regret to have to inform that on here you have no authority,to demand anything **

If it is acceptable for you to make false accusations and refuse to back them up by ignoring a request to show how you arrived at something, it is no okay for other to do it to you.

Why is it that this politician can be openly racist and not get fired?
I know we encourage open and freedom of speech but isn’t racism illegal?

To Yatesy.

Q1. Fraser Anning can not be "fired" because he is an elected member of Parliament.
Q2. If saying something racist is illegal, then freedom of speech does not exist in this country.

SR,

With all due respect the teenager committed unprovoked and premeditated common assault against FA and is lucky to get away without a criminal record. FA responding to the assault is given far more latitude, and since the aggressor eggboy suffered no serious injury and was let off with a slap on the wrist, any prosecutor would struggle to make a case.

PS, if the thug is called eggboy, then FA is eggbeater?

Sam Clench tells us on the web that -

"They call Fraser Anning the "accidental" senator.
Just 19 people voted for Anning at the 2016
election. Nineteen."

"He got into parliament anyway gaining a $200,000
taxpayer funded salary and a platform from which
to spew his dangerous bile."

" Üntil this week, many saw Anning as a troubling but
ultimately inconsequential sideshow doomed to leave
the senate at May's election and fade back into
irrelevance."

But his response to the New Zealand mosque massacres
and subsequent confrontation with an egg-wielding
teenager, has earned him notoriety around the
world.

Clever man. I wonder how much the teenager was paid
for the egg-throwing? Or perhaps he's a supporter?

Neil Erikson - the convicted criminal and right-wing
agitator was checking everybody at the door to the
event in which Fraser Anning was to speak. How did
this teenager pass inspection and how come he came
prepared in advance with eggs? Just asking.

It got Anning more publicity, more controversy.
All at the right time.
Co-incidence?
I wonder.

'Or perhaps he's a supporter?'

Of course Foxy all young and old white males fit with your stereotype narratives. He was probably related to Abbott or Trump. I mean some little spoilt brat certainly could not come from the regressives could they?

runner,

You mean like the ones who recently demonstrated
for climate-change throughout the cities around
Australia?

Hmmmmm.

cont'd ...

As for Abbott or Trump?

How much longer do you think those two will last?

I do wonder when was the last time one of these young antifa eggers smashed an Islamic hate preacher over the head with an egg. They would lose their head rather than suffer a headlock

as far as how long Abbott or Trump will last who knows. Certainly6 both of them done much more good in short periods than others have done in decades.

Waleed Aly put it so eloquently when he said
words to the effect:

"Everything we say to try to tear people apart,
divide people, demon ise particular groups,
set them against each other, that all has
consequences, even if we're not the ones
with our fingers on the trigger."

Both Trump and Abbott certainly have done a great
deal in the short space of time that they were/are in
public office - it willl take a very long time
for Abbott's party to recover. And for the US even
longer.

yeah we know Foxy. You often use tactics like that of Jussie Smollett. No doubt you saw the MAGA hat on the eggers head. Just keep believing your own hatreds dressed up in some sort of warped narrative.

Waleed Aly so elequently put?

Walleed Aly, my dear Foxy, is a member of a religion which instructs it's followers to "Fight the unbeleivers whom are near to you, lay ambushes for them, strike terror in their hearts." "Slay the idolators, wherever you find them."

It is a religion who's God instructs his followers to do to non believers, "cut off an arm or leg, from opposite sides of the body","cast their heads under their feet" and to "crucify them." "Take not Christians or Jews as your friends, would you give Allah proof against yourself?" "If you meet a Christian in the street, push them to the narrowest part of the way."

Waleed Ali's God even tells his followers to be ready to even people they are completely unaware of, "whom Allah knowest, but you knowest not."

Islam is a religion where they kill you if you try to leave it. It is a religion that thinks that Foxy is a possession of her husband or father.

But all Muslim Waleed Aly has to do is say a few nice platitudes, and since that is what Foxy want s to hear, she actually believes him, and thinks he is a nice man.

Hey Foxy. why don't you ask Waleed what should happen to homosexuals? He will say to you something like "Well Foxy, unfortunately, Allah has ordered that they all must be executed, so that's that."

Runner and Ozspen think that the universe was created in six days. And Foxy thinks that Muslims like Waled Aly are all nice people, who take no notice of their terrorism advocating God.

The problem is Islam itself. And kumbaya thinkers like Foxy, who think it is just wonderful that people who have been our self declared enemies for 1400 years should now live among us.

'Runner and Ozspen think that the universe was created in six days.'

Oh Lego I thought we had been through this before. You accept something from nothing, order from chaos, laws without a Lawmaker some 50000 oh no 1 million oh no 4 billion oh no 60 billion years ago. Any more frauds like pigs teeth for missing links? Has 60 billion years been revised yet. You really should give up on this one. The big bang and evolution are very irrational and accepted blindly just like man made gw. Stick to being rational instead of your pathetic digs. Your faith is far more irrational than that of Creationist.

Good point that "The poisoned well of anxiety and resentment is a deep and broad one, common to Islamic State and the right wing fundamentalism". It applies well to terrorists of all stripes. They are no better than bitter poisonous snakes.

But your discussion of Australian 'values' and how they influence events is non-existent. You rely on tired left-wing tropes about Australia being founded on "expropriation, dispossession and racial fear." Even if it were true it explains nothing much.

So you suggest Tarrant and Anning are both "representative of the broader whole", and somehow emblematic of mainstream Australia? "How pleasant it is to assume that something else is at play, that Anning and Tarrant are the exceptional monsters in the playground." This would be grossly offensive if it were not so absurd.

You are framing these events in a highly selective and limited way like most commentators who are reacting from a set of preconceived notions. Yes, we must stand against the extremes of hate and terror. Yes, the agendas of violent racists and stupid redneck politicians are warped and deserve to be challenged. But it is counterproductive to ignore the reasomnable everyday concerns of people in society.

In fact, many everyday Australians are concerned about unplanned immigration from non-Western, mainly Islamic countries, that have problematic cultural baggage. They are not all suffering from 'bruised White ego'. Some are stupid and hateful people of course, but most are neither racist nor angry, and many are not even white for that matter. They have a right to be heard and not smeared with leftist waffle. You need to stop accusing and start listening

Excellent post, JB.

Jay Bee,

The war of identities must end.
We need to stop preaching hatred.
Everything we say to try to tear people
apart, to divide people, to demonise
particular groups, set them against each other -
that all has consequences.

It needs to stop.

Foxy,

Here is an interesting comparison. Tony Abbott in 2015 responding to a rise in Islamist terrorism: “I’ve often heard Western leaders describe Islam as a religion of peace. I wish more Muslim leaders would say that more often and mean it.” This mild rebuke was too much for the Muslim community who reacted angrily, condemning the Prime Minister for his intolerant remarks. Fast forward a few years and all Australians are freely lectured by a noted Islamic activist about an attack on Muslims. Yassmin Abdel-Magied in 2019: “What are you going to do to make sure this never happens again? Yeh, You. Personally. What are you going to do? If you’re not going to change a single thing, and think it’s someone else’s job... do u think anything will change?” Why is the first response unacceptable but the second just fine? Unless both viewpoints can be respected there will be no coming together and resolving of our differences.

Well its obvious to me after being part of olo for possibly as long as Foxy that no one has changed each others opinions. Whether we have affected other people's opinions we will probably never know. Plenty of nasty insults from all sides while many consider my views 'hateful'. The forum has attracted bigots, snowflakes, lefties and righties. I think it would be correct to say that when I first started posting on olo that their was more lefties while that has swung around now to possibly have more conservatives. I think our country is certainly a lot more divided than I can recall in the 60 years or so of my life. I certainly have very strong views on issues however at the end of the day hope that my grandchildren get to live the privileged life I have lived in this great nation. Unfortunately I feel quite pessimistic.

Dear Jay Bee,

What am I personally going to do about it?

Glad you asked.

I'm going to do all the good I can
By all the means I can
In all the ways I can
In all the places I can\At all the times I can
To all the people I can
As long as ever I can.

How about you?

Foxy. "The war of identities must end."

Human beings are tribal and territorial, Foxy. Lacking horns, teeth, armour, spines and claws, our species should have been eaten and wiped out eons ago. But what made us formidable opponents against every other species on Earth, was our instinct to group together and fight as a group. It is in our DNA and it is what makes us human. You just can't tell people that they must rid themselves of their group identities to make world peace, because they can't.

It is just like telling teenagers that they must solve the world population bomb by patiently and reasonably telling them all that they must not have sex. Ain't gonna happen, Foxy.

The problem with you socialists, is that you keep trying to create a utopian society using human beings instead of robots. The old socialists tried to create a classless society and they failed. You can't make a classless society, because skill specialisation involving different levels of intelligence, and different types of intelligence will always stratify societies.

Now you are upping the ante and trying to make a race blind society and that is not going to work, either. As a matter of fact, just like socialism and the classless society, it never worked anywhere. Multiculturalism is just like the classless society, how many times does it need to fail before you admit it can't work?

Multiculturalism is a fantasy dreamed up by and rich and spoiled western academics. It has no currency at all among people who are not western. The Chinese, Russians, Indians, Arabs and Muslims could teach Hitler's National Socialists a thing or two about nationalism.

Every person has multiple identities which are very important to them. A woman might have a university educated identity, a career professional identity, a mother identity, a feminist identity, a vollyballer identity, and a Greens voter identity. But one thing is certain, there are other groups who are either in competition to your groups, or outright opposed to your groups. And you don't like them. Maybe even outright hostile to them.

Foxy,

I didn't ask you anything. "What are you going to do to make sure this never happens again?" is a quote from Abdel-Magied. She is a twit.

Jay Bee,

I think that Yasmin is more of a sunflower.
She loves facing the sun - but admittedly
she's got to go through dirt to get there.

LEGO,

So what's your answer to today's problems -
keep on doing what we're doing, and keep on
getting what we currently have?
That doesn't seem logical.

Well, to start with Foxy, you say you want to prevent tribal division? Could I remind you that it was the Left who invented identity politics? This consists of encouraging ethnics to celebrate their cultural differences, and then to appeal to the various ethnic voting blocks through government programs and cash. This is reinforced by both Labor and Liberal politicians always sucking up to ethnic voters while ignoring their own people. Then wondering why Australians have done a bit of identity politics themselves and given their loyalty to Pauline Hanson.

Another, is to always blame the misfortunes of every dysfunctional ethnic group in Australia on The Great Satan. White people. No matter what the problem, white people can always be blamed and defamed with a lot of fiddling with the facts. Look at the so called "stolen generation" lie.

So, if you want to prevent tribal division, I would stop being a lefty.

Now, as for solutions. My premise is, stop all Muslim immigration into Australia immediately. It probably won't stop the coming civil war, but it least might delay it a few more decades.

Think that is far fetched? Our suburbs are balkanising and it will only take some mullah to declare his suburb completely Muslim, and demand sharia law, and you will have a Kosovo situation. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, Australia now has two flags. The Australian flag and a racist aboriginal one flying over public buildings. This by itself is a portent of dangerously deep social division in this country.

Only import people into this country who can contribute to the greater good. Simply importing masses of people from incompatible cultures, or from always dysfunctional ethnicities, will do nothing except raise our crime rates, bankrupt our social security systems, and destroy our social cohesion.

Good fences make good neighbours. With Islam, Our damned leaders should tell Muslims to reform their terrorism endorsing religion or wallow in poverty forever. The choice is theirs. Don't leave your dysfunctional countries for ours and expect us to bend to your backward ways.

LEGO,

I think that as long as we insist on the rule of law
and we make all of our citizens subscribe to an
institutional framework that preserves tolerance
and protects order - we can celebrate and enjoy diversity
in religion, language and culture. But we could not do that
without the framework which guarantees the freedom to enjoy
diversity.

To be an Australian citizen one pledges loyalty to Australia.
One pledges to share certain beliefs - democratic beliefs -
to respect the rights and liberty of others and to respect
and abide by the rule of law.

This citizenship pledge should be a big flashing warning
sign to those who want to live under sharia law. A person
who does not acknowledge the supremacy of civil law laid
down by democratic processes cannot truthfully take the
pledge of allegiance. As such they do not meet the
preconditions for citizenship. If you have strong
objections to these values - don't come to Australia.

This has to be made very clear. It is not optional.

Foxy, every state on planet Earth has a defining central culture, usually predicated upon the religion of the majority, but also upon the culture of the majority language group. Minorities can be tolerated provided that they are capable of a high degree of assimilation with the majority. Especially if the majority culture has values that tolerate minorities and the two cultures are not profoundly dissimilar.

The problem arises when minority cultures have cultural values diametrically opposed to that of the majority. But provided that they largely obey the law of the majority, even such minorities can be tolerated. But when a minority culture with opposing values increases it's population through immigration or birth rate differentials, then it is only a matter of time before the question arises as to who's culture will define the laws? As minority population proportion increases, hostility by the majority towards the growing minority will increase. Such a scenario is an absolute truth and is as immutable as the law of gravity.

Hostility towards the minority will be exacerbated if some within the minority engage in acts of violence and terrorism towards the majority. This can be mitigated if the leaders of the minority publically disassociate themselves from actions of their most violent members. But if the leaders of the minority refuse to condemn the troublemakers, then the state is headed towards serious civil strife, terrorism, and eventually, civil war.

Inter cultural and inter religious civil wars, my dear Foxy, are really bad wars. Massacres and genocide are committed by both sides. The only solution is for the minority to be either driven out or exterminated. Or, for the country to divide into separate countries, each with it's own defining culture. Which just goes to show that monoculturalism was the better option all along.

The problem starts all over again when the most successful culture creates a prosperous nation, and the unsuccessful culture turns their new nation into a cesspit. At that stage, the minority culture will then endeavour to immigrate into the lands of the successful culture, by crossing borders or jumping on boats.

LEGO,

As a policy White Australia is gone. But as an
ideology it arguably lingers on. There
certainly is a minority who want to reclaim an
imagined idyllic Australia of yesteryear with its
white monoculture.

An overwhelming majority, however, agree
- multiculturalism is here to stay.

Australia under the White Australia Policy was an infinitely safer society than Australia ( or New Zealand) today. I don't know whether a majority of Australians supported the white Australia policy or not. It's abolition was imposed upon us by a Labor government without recourse to public opinion. As a young person, I supported the abolition of the white Australia policy because I had been brainwashed by my teachers to think that all races were equal. I was smart enough to know that all cultures most certainly were not equal, but I presumed that the government would not go so far as to create an immigration program which ensured the social suicide of my own race, in my own country.

I had forgotten about the pendulum effect. That is, that the white Australia policy was enforced by people who were fundamentalist racists and who would never contemplate the immigration of anybody who did not have a white skin, regardless of that person's worth or character. These public servants were then replaced by fundamentalist anti racists who insisted that every race and culture was equal, and who opened the floodgates to people from third world crap holes regardless of worth, and when the predicted social problems eventuated, went into denial mode and insisted that nothing was wrong.

With Europeans now realising that their societies are going backward, mainly caused by the importation of people who do not share our values and who refuse to assimilate (while living on our social security and committing serious crimes against us), the pendulum is swinging back. Anti immigration parties are the new force in European countries and the danger is that the pendulum will swing as far to the right as it can go.

The smart thing for lefties like Foxy to do is to admit that their extremist policies are a disaster and to mitigate the increasing racism of Europeans towards troublesome minorities by instigating a more discriminatory immigration policy. The very first reform would be to admit that Islam and democracy are incompatible and to stop Islamic immigration into western countries.

LEGO,

Most recent research shows 85% of Australians agree
that multiculturalism has been good for the country.
The Scanlon Foundation's Multicultural Discussion
Paper has been tracking people's views across more than
a decade of surveys. Data shows Australians are generally
very accepting of cultural diversity and immigration
but the level of support varies across generations,
geographical locations and demographic groups.

Still, as I've stated earlier - prejudice never
survives a personal inter-action, and the more
we can do to foster - not just tolerance that other
people might have a different culture than us - but
actually foster inter-cultural relationships and
facilitate a real discussion between people of different
backgrounds the more we are going to change people's
perceptions and prejudices.

To Foxy.

Were those the same "opinion polls" who confidently predicted that Trump did not have a snowball's chance in Hell of becoming President? Or, who confidently predicted that the British would remain in the EU?

And I'll bet you are right that that support for multiculturalism differs between geographical locations and demographic groups. Those who live the closest to the problems of cultural division are the most against it, and those who live the furtherest away are the biggest supporters. Recently arrived migrants think it is great because they want to make Australia just like the cesspit country they fled from, while white Australians hate it because it is making Australia look like a bankrupt third world cesspit.

Now you are chanting mantras about prejudice and tolerance. Everybody prejudges, Foxy, just like you did when you negatively stereotyped right wingers on another topic. And tolerance can never be an end in itself. If you tolerate everything, you stand for nothing. Do you tolerate National Socialists?

Lieutenant Lego to Captain Foxy. "Captain, we are sailing in uncharted waters and we need to slow down and change course before we hit an iceberg, like that great big one right ahead of us which every other ship that came this way has hit and been sunk by. We have already hit a bunch of little ones which have damaged our ship of state, but if we slow down and change course now, we might reduce the damage we will receive when we finally hit it."

Captain Foxy to Lego. "We can't change course or slow down now lieutenant, too many passengers are enjoying the ride and want us to go faster. In any case, our political officer assured me that icebergs were harmless. The only threats to our remaining afloat comes from white icebergs anyway, and we don't care about them. The reports of ships hitting icebergs and sinking is just a media beat up. And in any case, this ship is unsinkable."

LEGO,

1) I did not prejudge right-wingers.
That was your wrong assumption.

2) What I did was simply describe the psychological
make-ups and mind-sets that certain people have.
Certain personality patterns.

3) You made the assumption that I was stereotyping you
and right-wingers. I wonder why that was?
Hmmmmmmm.

4) I tolerate a great deal. In life one has to
to be able to survive and cope. That does not mean that
I stand for nothing - on the contrary.

As for your references to the Titanic?
The Titanic hit the iceberg not because they could not
see it coming but because they could not change direction.

The essence of leadership is being able to see when
its time to change direction.

Australia needs that leadership.

To Foxy.

If you label an entire group of people with negative generalisations, you are stereotyping them with a negative prejudgement. It's just so funny how lefties insist that everybody must not engage in behaviour which is perfectly natural and which they do themselves, and then they can't recognise their own contradictions when they do it themselves.

Get it through your head that everybody on planet Earth stereotypes, prejudges, and labels, and is intolerant of somebody. You would be well advised to recognise the wisdom of my words and agree with what is just plain self evident, with good grace. Because if not, I am going to amuse myself pointing it out to you every time you drop a clanger.

My reference to the Titanic is in response to your gleeful remark that it is too late for Australia to doing anything about destroying our superior culture through immigration and cultural division. It is amusing to think that you actually think that destroying your own people's culture is somehow a good thing, and rejoice that it can't be stopped.

But your are right that Australia needs good leadership. A person who realises that freedom of speech is the foundation of democracy, for without that inalienable right, no free people can decide for themselves what is right or what is wrong. After the Christchurch massacre, we now have a legion of lefties trying to use that fact to shut up the critics of cultural division by labelling free speech as "hate speech." If you lefties destroy free speech in this country, my prediction is that this country will have taken a giant stride towards serious civil unrest and even civil war.

Aux barricades! Bogans of the world unite!

LEGO,

More corrections for you.

I did not label an entire group of people.
Only ones who displayed certain characteristics
mind-sets, and behaviours in their posts on this forum.

Yet you're the one who is labeling entire groups of
people that you refer to as "Lefties."
What exactly do you mean by that term? Anyone who's
views don't agree with yours?

Most people that I know have different stances on various
issues. Depending on the issues involved. A person can
be very conservative in some areas, and very broad-minded
and tolerant in others. It all depends on what's being
discussed.

You don't have to concern yourself about my dropping
"clangers." Keep an eye out for your own.
I don't drop " clangers." I pick them up.

As for my "gleeful" remark about
Australia - about destroying our "superior" culture through
immigration and cultural division?
That's not something I would ever say.
I am proud of our multicultural and diverse, vibrant and
rich society.

As for free speech versus hate speech?

Saying you don't like people of a certain race, religion,
cultural background - that's free speech. It's your right
and - That's okay. But there is a line that needs to be
drawn. And that is -
When you tell them they don't deserve to be here
and they're murderers, and you personally are going to
throw them out - that's hate speech that carries actual
risks and consequences - which is hate speech - and that's
not okay.

Hate speech is when speech actually leads to harm.
And that is never okay.

Yes, you did, Foxy. You labelled your opponents with several derogatory characteristics, which is a negative prejudgement. THAT is stereotyping. You also labelled people like yourself as having positive characteristics. That is stereotyping too, although positive stereotypes don't register in the brains of lefties as something wrong. That one slips through their cognitive circuits without crunching their mental gears.

And of course I stereotype, Foxy, just like you do. Just like everybody does. Stereotypes are simply generalisations, and people use generalisations all of the time to think. Saying that stereotyping is wrong, is exactly like saying that thinking is wrong. C'mon girl, you have a degree, you should be smart enough to figure that one out for yourself?

FOXY. "Most people that I know have different stances on various issues."

Right. You just made a generalisation about a group of people that you identified with the label, "most people." That is your general opinion about the attitudes of "most people". THAT is your stereotype of "most people's" attitudes. Your stereotype does not need to be absolutely right, just right enough for you to form a concept of how you think "most people's" attitudes really are. Are you getting it now? People form stereotypes to think about groups of people.

Stereotyping "most people" by saying that they have "differing attitudes on most subjects" is essentially true. But political differences are stereotyped by "most people" as either belonging to the left or the right. This is because people with right wing views, generally speaking, tend towards right wing views on most other subjects, while generally speaking, people with left wing views do the same thing. Therefore, the general concept for "left" and "right" is a stereotype that is valid. The stereotype doesn't have to be absolutely correct, just correct enough to form a general concept of what "most people" think a person from the left or the right believes in.

The line in political free speech already exists, and that is "incitement to violence." Everything else is free speech. Moving that legal border is left wing fascist political oppression.

LEGO,

I never argue.

I simply explain why I'm right.

http://www.thenation.com/article/christchurch-massacre-australia-racism-white-nationalism-media/

http://theconversation.com/how-believers-in-white-genocide-are-spreading-their-hate-filled-message-in-australia-106605

LEGO,

I read your theory on "Left" and "Right" concepts.

Where does the concept of clear rational thought (logic)
fit in your theory?

For the murdered fallen in Christchurch http://youtu.be/ijDcHT9Zl8U

The Song of the Murdered Fallen of Christchurch http://youtu.be/ijDcHT9Zl8U

is sung in a made up LANGUAGE called "IDIOGLOSSIA" (an idiosyncratic language) probably sounding most akin to French.

CORRECTION:

Title now changed to "CHRISTCHURCH VICTIMS"

http://youtu.be/ijDcHT9Zl8U

Foxy Quote "I never argue.
I simply explain why I'm right."

** Delusional, you are wrong more than you are right, so what do you do then, you resort to useless links or sarcasm with the occasional nasty comment thrown in. **

To Foxy.

If you don't "argue" (actually, debate) then all you are doing is submitting unsupported opinions. When challenged by your opponents on either your facts or your logic, your refusal to respond will not win you any converts. Nor even help those misguided people who share your values and expect you to aid them in defending your commonly shared beliefs, and also convincing others.

But it helps my side a lot, so keep up the good work.

The "logic" of left and right was clearly explained to you. But since you seem to have trouble with this simple concept I will endeavour to explain it better.

University educated lefties often come out with this idiotic slogan that there can be no right or left side of politics, because people often have opinions in both camps. Therefore, they say, "left" and "right" can not exist. Their logic being that unless a concept is absolutely correct in it's description, then it is incorrect. That is complete BS. Even a dumb electrician like me knows that generalizations don't need to be absolutely correct, only correct enough to form a concept. It is like saying that if someone says that "birds are flying through the sky", then they must not say that because some birds (Emus, Penguins, and Ostriches) don't fly.

Generally speaking, "right wing" people are patriotic, love their flag, oppose open borders, support the deportation of foreign criminals, oppose the republic, oppose cringing to aborigines who are dependent upon their welfare, are racist, want to balance the budget, oppose the concept of Human Induced Global Warming, and put the welfare of their own people first.

Generally speaking, left wing people are traitors, hate their flag, support open borders, don't want foreign criminals deported, support the republic, have a compulsive need to cringe to aborigines, are racist towards white people, think that money falls from the skies like manna, support the fiction of HIGW, and put the welfare of their own people last.

Lastly, lefties use the terms "left and right" themselves. I double dog dare you to stop doing that.