Sneekeepete aka Kym:

Most immigrants abide by our laws and honour our customs....and always have in my lifetime. They settled here before the pernicious doctrine of multiculturalism was imposed. In retrospect, I wonder if it was imposed precisely because it was obvious that some (please note that word) Muslims would not fit in and Australians had to be forced to live alongside polygamy, women in head to toe shrouds in 24 degree heat and people who instruct children that they do not have to obey Australian law if it conflicts with Islam.

Immigrants are advised that women in Australia are equal to men, but I doubt you would be welcome to say it at the mosque and it is clearly not honoured in many homes. Then there is the charming view held by some that Australian women who go out alone or wear revealing clothes are whores deserving of rape.

And the banning of ham sandwiches at state schools because Muslim kids might be offended. Australian Jews managed for centuries not to be offended when their friends ate ham and never thought to insist it be banned. Let's not get into the attempts to ban Christmas.

Criminalising speech was the next step. Racial vilification is nasty and socially unacceptable,but whatever happened to sticks and stones breaking bones but names never hurting? Australians had to be stopped from speaking critically of behaviours they find abhorrent and which break the spirit and sometimes the letter of our law.

It isn't hard to see where racial/cultural intolerance started in Australia. Meantime, Australians who complain are called racist. I wonder what people who danced in the streets on September 11,2001 should be called?

Australians want back the freedoms that were removed by repressive policy and legislation - starting with freedom of speech. It is funny that those who recently screeched so shrilly about the restrictions on comment imposed by the anti-terrorism laws are the same people who are determined to muzzle anyone who dares to voice an opinion about immigration policy.

Bushbred Part Two

2. Both Britain and America’s determination to keep most of the Middle East under what can only be termed imperial control as if the Middle East was or is still needed to be kept that way to make it a safer world. With the track records of both Britain and America regarding the oil-rich Middle-East since the end of WW1, surely it is only a very naive global public who would believe that the US / UK Angliphole Alliance would have the galle to guarantee decent democracy in Iraq at this late stage.

3. As regards Muslim migration into non- Islamic areas, while it could be said that the though the original Muslim families who migrated to Australia before the problem of Israeli nuclear capabilities mentioned above would have integrated satisfactorilly, more recent events and problems in the ME has surely caused the younger members of the migrant families to become more stirred up. Here, some of our extreme Aussie brethren could be on the ball in blaming our universities, who in actual fact do bring out the real historical truth of such matters, similar to what happens to certain of our newer generational Aborigines who attend universities.

However, if such is so, the whole of Western society, including our religious sects, have some very deep perusing to do. Thoughts like Nelson Mandela’s about forgiveness and both sides sharing the blame for the terrorist problems, and not so much following blind faith, but using that sensible balance between faith and reason, first recommended to the West by Muslim scholars, which in our Aussie lingo, only means plain commonsense.
George C, WA - Bushbred

“History Never Repeats”?

SCOUT and others are begging for answers:
>>I challenge Boaz-David, Philo, Coach, Kactuz and the other usual culprits to come up with REALISTIC solutions <<

Having watched this thread and others it’s clear that the opinions are divided. In a sense what most are trying to deal with the symptoms and not the problem.

The problem is very obvious, but the solution very complex.

We hear words like: racism, multiculturalism, thugs, Lebanese, gangs, even ‘wogs’ made a brief comeback, law enforcement, patriotism, beaches, mosques, anglos, etc…

Mostly raw emotions fuelled by the current unrest. But no real effort to seek and find the real cause of it all; and until we start to self educate ourselves about the reason for the behaviour of some community groups, namely Lebanese; and learn from past history; the situation will continue to deteriorate.

Chapter I
1. The Civil war in Lebanon 1975-1990
2. Not all Lebanese are muslims
3. Not all muslims are Lebanese
4. The conflict in Lebanon was started by muslims.
5. The Christians and others sectarians, had to rise to the challenge and defend their neighbourhoods.
6. The result was two decades of terror + lack of adequate education + diminished opportunities + constant religious intolerance + much bitterness

Chapter II
1. Some Lebanese find refuge in Australia
2. Host country soft, tolerant, lay-back, mostly unaware of Religious issues.
3. Islam becomes more visible.
4. Host country tries to be more tolerant.
5. Islam gains momentum
6. Host country tries to legalise tolerance.
7. Islam ‘in your face – this is our country’ attitude
8. Host country fails to recognise real problem.
9. Islam declares war on all non-muslim lifestyle
10. Host country had to rise to the challenge and defend their neighbourhoods.

Chapter III

D2:

Racial vilification was partially to blame for the most recent brou ha ha in Sydney; it was the words that incited the use of the sticks and the stones - and if words werent damaging we probably wouldnt have long standing laws of libel or slander.

Do go on about Christmas! the push to ban Christmas or its celebration has come as much from atheists as any one else - and if Christmas is relegated to a religious observance rather than consumer driven pig out we are probably better off any way.

And lets not assume that it is only immigrants who use the fact some women dress in alluring clothing as an excuse for sexual assault - it is and has long been an old stand excuse for Anglo thugs as well - its men.

Ask women if they feel equal now - any where. They have only had access to equal pay in the past thirty years - we should not be too chuffed at our treatment of women - sexual discrimination is only a matter of degrees.

I abhorred the dancing in the streets at the sight of the Twin Towers coming down as much as i did the incessant wooo wooos when another Allied bomb slammed into dwellings in Iraq - obscene triumphalism is not limited to immigrants -

Speech remains fairly free here: lots of vilification, lies and misinterpretation here and not much prosecution from where I sit.

I agree. There have been instances where we have failed to enforce our own rights to eat the ham and deck the halls - we still havent moved past the one dimensional view on most things and until we do half of us will always be pissed off at some one.

Sneekypete: Real democracies don't have repressive defamation laws, either and, as in the US, they have a special privilege exempting otherwise defamatory statements about public officials. NSW politicians would quake in their boots if that privilege existed here.

Words are only words. Adults in civilised society ignore juvenile taunts. The fact that a freedom celebrated by our society for hundreds of years, through many waves of immigration, had to be specifically removed for this group, indicates that the decision makers knew what we are only now discovering. Some groups do not wish to fit in. They wish us to change in order to accommodate them. At its most extreme, they wish to impose their views, up to and including vile legal systems, on us. D2

D2:
I think you gravely underestimate the power of words - words are the tools of a great many people, politicians included; after all politics is essentially war without weapons - only words.

I assume you refer to the racial/religious vilification laws when you talk about curtailment of free speech - Racial vilifacation first saw the light of day in the seventies and was withdrawn from the federal scene due to Senate opposition; NSW past the first Racial Vilificatio laws in 1989 - it was a Liberal Countrry party coalitin under Griener - WA followed at some stage in the face of activites by the Australian Nationalists - against groups other than muslims ( I assume these are those you refer to) In SA the passage of simialr laws was a bi partisan decision - the current laws have little to do with Islamism in so far as their developemnt goes - it just happens they are flavor of the month - in thirty years time I guess we as a nation might fear some on else - it seems we cant go too long with out picking on some one.

Your post suggests law makers saw this coming and for some perverse reason set up strucutres to make life easier for Muslims - you afford far to much prescience to our legislators who had these laws in the pipe line three decades ago - when it was Asians in the corss hairs of the fearfull.

Over time the notion of religious vilification has been wrapped up in parralel legislation - there's a fair amount of justification for it in these pages I would suggest