Keith Kennelly gives us another topic about the policy of multiculturalism and adds his imprimatur. Topics on the policy of multiculturalism seem a bit de trop here at OLO.

"The freedom of all Australians to express and share their cultural values..." That cherished freedom to express ourselves at the ballot box on issues like multiculturalism didn't exist at all.

"For the last 28 years our multicultural policy has been an outstanding success." I would hope so. Starving our health budget, roads budget, education budget and other budgets in order to pump funds into multiculturalism should make it a brilliant success. The publication "The Cost of Multiculturalism" put the cost at AUD$7.2 billion per year. OUR money is spent on things like:

Association of Bhanin El Minieh - Australian Arabic Community Welfare Centre Inc.

"Settlement services to Arabic refugees, humanitarian entrants and newly arrived migrants in Auburn local government area"

Provide settlement services to newly arrived migrants,refugees and humanitarian entrants of Arabic backgrounds in the Auburn Local Government Area, consisting of casework, information and referral, group work, community development and facilitating clients' access to mainstream services.

Does anyone know what that means? Does that mean escorting migrants with no English language skills to the nearest CentreLink office?

While this nonsense is taking place Mrs Brown has to wait 11 months for a hip replacement operation.

It's lunacy.

Dear Keith

If you view some of my comments within the Multicultural posting by Danny NALLIAH you'll note that I am basically opposed to multiculturalism. I am a strong proponent of multi-ethnicity, however. I despise racial hatred.

I now go to the definition of multiculturalism: have we lost the ability to define concepts? If I don't know what an apple is, then why in the explanation & definition of an apple would that word "apple" be almost pivotal in the attempt to gain clarity.

The definition begins: "Multicultural" is a term that describes the cultural and linguistic diversity ..". That almost assumes that I don't know what the word "multi" means. The confusion is actually in the word "culture".

You & others might specifically care to read my post at 8:48:03 AM 30/1/2006 to Rancitas from "Are we deceived by multiculturalism?". However, it is important to put things in context by reading all the other postings.

The dilemma that Australia faces by promoting a "multicultural society" is that culture doesn't just stop at the semantics of language, the traditional clothes worn or the food eaten. it is much more entrenched into philosophical concepts, & includes behavioural pattern & the adherence to perceptions of right/wrong & legalities.

One can't separate the desire to follow, say Sharia law, from the culture of a Koranic-believing Muslim, than we can for their desire to isolate themselves into self-proclaimed ghettos. Therein lies the problem. There are the exceptions, sure. And I elude to those.

I will not seek an " automatic notification" to this site.

Cheers

I do not agree with Keith and find his comments or the lack of - naive and somehow irritating. The propaganda exercise is not the way to remedy a disfunctional social issue.

Multiculturalism is a name given to a social phenomenon after the facts. It was not a planned process (by government) - more like an experiment without clear guidelines or definite objectives.

As a nation we are not 'tolerant' - but accepting and pacifists. Australians - like any other human beings - are racist. No one is comfortable with difference. Someone chatting loudly in a train or restaurant in a different language is a sure way to attract a unpleasant stare or even “Why don’t you speak in English..” remark.

Yes there are many advantages: economic, cultural, and of course culinary, BUT this is in spite of multiculturalism and not because of it. These factors have often been used to celebrate MC disguising all its other problems.

Wrong legislations like Anti-vilification laws for example are sure to put a great damper on integration and tolerance. The already limited freedom of expression within MC – namely speech – is being severely compromised; much more so when a cultural expression and its own religious beliefs are deeply intertwined

Keith, for someone supposedly so widely travelled, you certainly have a very narrow view of world reality

“One of the "hidden" benefits is how we look at our Indigenous people.”

I may be putting my foot in it here, but I haven't seen that. The attitude to indigenous people here is coming about by education and the reality, of how some have to live their lives in a modern society like ours.

Multiculturalism has given some ideologies recruitment rights, that are turning some indigenous people into religious warriors, in their attempt to get the recognition, services and power they desire. Sadly they will just become cannon fodder for relgious advancement

“It is remarkable how there has been so little tension between the great diversity of communities within Australia over the last 30 years.”

You must live in very narrow small world to believe that, cultural tension has been growing constantly for the last 30 years, not diminishing. I don't know what sort of business you are in, but mine, hospitality and tourism, gives indications completely the opposite to yours.

My clientel is very multicultural, as are my travels. I was in Europe recently and asked many from varying cultures, how they felt we were coping in this country. All of them said, we were making a big mistake in believing that multiculturalism will work here, considering the debacle it is in Europe and the depth of anger and fear it is causing.

Maybe Keith, you haven't been to suburbs in this country where the majority of shop signs are in a foreign language.

Coach, you may be racist, but we aren't all like you, luckily.

The point of the article is essentially summarised by the author's claim:

'For the last 28 years our multicultural policy has been an outstanding success.'

To examine this, we must ask to what extent the Government's multicultural policy 'addresses the consequences of this (cultural and linguistic) diversity in the interests of the individual and society as a whole.' The policy 'recognises, accepts, respects and celebrates our cultural diversity.' The term cultural diversity here is vague, considering the broad range of interpretations of the noun 'culture'. Does cultural diversity include religion? Of it course does, you might say.

If cultural diversity includes religion then, do Islam and its followers comply with the Government expectations layed out in the paragraph 'The freedom of all Australians..'?

Firstly, 'an overriding loyalty to Australia and its people' - No. Their overriding loyality is to the teachings of Islam and to other Muslims.
Secondly, the Constitution - No. Islam teaches that all legal structures except those born from Islamic scriptures are completely illegitimate and worthless.
Thirdly, parliamentary democracy - No. Not under the 'rule of Allah' therefore redundant.
Fourthly, freedom of speech and religion - No. Islam teaches that no-one is allowed to question the truth of its scriptures, and that all other religions are enemies and must be challenged by Jihad.
Fifthly, English as the national language - Preferrably not. Arabic is the preferred language of Islam.
Sixthly, the rule of law - Yes, but not Australian law. Only Islamic law is considered truly relevant.
Seventh and eighth, acceptance and equality - No for both. Only Islamic practices are acceptable. The only people considered equal to each other are Muslim males. Everyone else is offically inferior.

So out of the 8 principles of Multiculturalism as outlined by the Australian Government, which everyone is expected to adhere to, Islam and its proponents recognise a total of: None.

Even if the author's claim is generally accurate, the glaring exception must be the integration of Islam, since Islam is fundamentally opposed to the Australian nation. The self-proclaimed purpose of Islam is to establish a global, all-powerful Islamic state.

I'm constantly amazed by the sweeping generalisations people on these forums make about 'Islam'. I know some Muslims. None of Ev's claims accurately describe them or their beliefs, any more than Fred Nile is representative of the nation's Christians.

All that money spent on Multiculture would have been better spent on educating Aboriginals to University status and sending money to third world nations to help them help themselves instead of importing them here.
Multiculture is like putting a fox into a chicken house and expecting it to get along with the chickens.
It is a failed policy and all it has done is mess up a good country.
People gush about the culinary side, cook books are available everywhere.
Bringing in immigrants from the third world is only going to drag us down to their level.
It is just a fairy tale that Multiculture will work.

KRS 1,

So which of the 8 points raised by Ev don’t you agree with?

You know ‘some muslims’ do you? Many (thank God) are pseudo-muslims and are generally speaking good people. But this is the exception to the “norm”. Being a true muslim is to follow and apply the teaching of the Qur’an (and all its other derivative books). And we all know what that practice leads to…?

You mentioned good old Fred Niles – well his views are as close to true Christianity as you will find. His views are the “norm” however the majority in Australia are pseudo-christians. They call themselves Christians just because they are not something else. They would not know the difference between religions and sadly believe that they all are the same etc…

So unless you come back on this forum and substantiate your sweeping remark we will conclude that you are either clueless on islam or categorically defending it. Which is is?

Ev

Congratulations. You picked the point of my article exactly.

'...the glaring exception must be the integration of Islam, since Islam is fundamentally opposed to the Australian nation. The self-proclaimed purpose of Islam is to establish a global, all-powerful Islamic state.'

In the conclusion of my article I stated:

'I have concluded the above definition suits my multiculturalism and reflects the multiculturalism of most, but not all, Australians'

The use of 'most, but not all' was alluding to exactly your conclusion.

I have previously asked Muslim contributors to Online Opinion to supply their definition of Multi-culturalism. None has been forthcoming.

One only has to read the witness statement of Mark John Durie in the hearing in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal between the Islamic Council of Victoria and Catch the Fire Ministries, Danial Nailliah and Danial Scott to garner an understanding of the accuracy of your statement.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001307.php

Coach-

What kind of shirt are you wearing? Is it polyester cotton? I hope not, because if it is you're going against Leviticus 19:19- 'thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed: neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee'. I guess that would make you one of those 'pseudo-christians' you so detest. Facetious, I know. But the point is that no adherents of any religion are entirely faithful to their holy texts. If Ev's comments are applied sweepingly to all Muslims (and they are) then I disagree with all of them. It's absurd as me saying 'all Christians hate gays and wear garments of the same fabric'.

In conclusion, I'm not categorically defending Islam. I'm just pointing out that there's a certain diversity of opinion in it. And for the record, I think Christianity and Islam are equally stupid.

Yes, Australia has been a multiracial country for a long time. But now we have an enforced political policy of MULTICULTURALISM which is not the same thing as NATURAL evolution of multiculturalism ensuing from non-discriminatory immigration.

Big government again raised its ugly head, providing an industry for the ethnic bosses and community leaders who may or may not be representative of their fellows. We have been told often enough on OLO by people who should know that they are not representative, and they don’t speak for everyone. One of these characters actually described his community as his ‘constituents’ recently.

According to Keith Kennelly – an immigrant himself – we are now, as a nation, “more committed to and embrace multiculturalism more comfortably now than any point in our history”.

Is that really so? How does he know? What criteria has he used? Does he mix only with people who agree with him?

Mr.Kennelly’s 7th paragraph could also be speculation on his part. To know what he claims to be truth, he would have to be omnipotent: there are 20 odd million people here with views.

Perhaps he is omnipotent. “Multiculturalism simply works”, he trumpets. By gum! Is this the Second Coming?

As for his economic benefits of a policy, which we could have for nothing (natural evolution of what was always going to happen as it has in the past), has he looked at the cost of keeping the multiculturalism circus on the road recently? Around 2% of Australia’s $369 billion GDP at the beginning. I hate to think what it is now.

I just loved the bit on Sydney. He is “biased (surely not!) in (his) answer” but he doesn’t actually give an answer. Again, he doesn’t let modesty get the better of him, just admitting to being “cheeky”, when he assumes that what suits him suits most, if not all Australians.

Bless you, Keith. You are a real card

Do any of these contributors have any experience of truly multicultural societies? Apparently not, otherwise the verbiage would end. Many of the world's new nations are genuine multicultures. The key problem their colonial rulers faced was creating viable central loyalties and national institutions among scores or hundreds of disparate tribal peoples with very different languages, laws, and concepts of authority. (Incidentally, it would help an understanding of "colonialism" if critics could grasp that essential fact.)
Here migrants come into a long-established nation with solid central ideas, ideals, and institutions, and accepting those is de rigueur if they want citizenship. In practice the vast majority of their children born here quickly assimilate. I recall meeting on a remote Greek island some years ago an 18-year-old girl of Greek parentage sent back to their village for 6 months after completing her HSC, to "maintain the heritage". She had 2 months to go when I met her, and couldn't wait to leave: found the whole environment claustrophobic, and desperately anxious to get back to her Aussie schoolfriends.
This whole argument is much ado about nothing. People worried here should just spend a year or two in a really multicultural situation.
Incidentally, spending money on assisting rapid integration is a good bargain. This country desperately needs at least replacement population and workers with some skills, including manual skills.

KRS-1 prima facie what you say seems reasonable. But you misunderstand the crucial concept.

In Judaism and Christianity God's reveals himself through his imperfect creatures who are historically and contextually conditioned.

If we want to understand what is meant by the passage in the Bible we have to understand what kind of book it is, who wrote it, when, and in what context.

The more we know about humans and history, the more we will understand God's Revelation. It is a living book.

What is right to change as we change - does.

The Qur'an however was allegedly delivered by the Archangel Gabriel and a copy resides in Heaven. This is an eternal unchanging completely explicit revelation. (And utterly ugly) This means the Qur'an cannot be contextualised, what you see is what you get. God has told you what to do exactly you must do it!

The Qur'an is a complete jumble. It is not in chronological order, 20% is incomprehensible. It requires the Sunnahs (histories and records of Mohammed and his activities) to try to understand it. These records (hadiths) together with the Q are demonic in every sense of the word.

Please read this. It is an excellent summation of what Islam is all about, I don’t think you’ll find better on the internet.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001307.php

We have been confused by GW Bush saying “Islam is a religion of peace; the terrorists hijack a peaceful religion” and Pope John Paul II saying nice ecumenical things about Islam. They are aware the west is very pc and have to be politically expedient. An explanation of this is here:

‘Why even the Pope has to whisper’

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/others/spengler.html

What Hitler and Nazism meant was there for all to read in Mein Kampf 20 years before the war. Winston Churchill was persecuted for speaking out against the Germans before the war. He knew what it meant.

Europe has let too many Muslims in its probably too late for them now.

If we want to know it there in black and white.

Appeasement and accomodation of this religion is suicide. Eg Netherlands.

Hi all

It's expanded since my posting this morning.

Sage (posted 10:48:54 AM 30/1/06)
Spot-on. Worse? A certain professor who is a lecturer at Monash University, & an Anglican priest, falsely bears witness in the ICV vs CTFM VCAT Case # A392/2002. Refer p 49 of Judge HIGGINS "Summation" - misquoted is Matt 7:9; s/b 5:7. That individual is a well-paid founding member of the Australian Multicultural Foundation, headed by Hass DELAL. That tax-payer funded case costs? Millions. And two pastors 'crippled'.

Coach (posted 11:34:02 AM 30/1/06)
Couldn't agree more!

Alchemist (posted 12:06:28 PM 30/1/06)
I get a similar feedback from those I talk with from overseas - & they're people whom I didn't know before. They think that we're "nuts" for embracing multiculturalism.

Ev (posted 2:29:55 PM 30/1/06)
A good summary. I hadn't done those calculations before. Well put.

KSR 1 (posted 2:35:59 PM 30/1/2006)
Your quote: "I know some Muslims". Fantastic! How many?
I know well in excess of 200 Muslims - people like Keysar TRAD very well. My hairdresser is about the nicest. He's 'nominal'. Doesn't know the Qur'an. He's horrified by what I've shown him - he can read it in Arabic as well as English from my copy (approved by Keysar).
The Qur'an is in constant conflict with itself in accordance with what is called “An-Nasekh wa Al-Mansoukh” (the abrogated & abrogating text). I can give examples in both Arabic & English to ad nausium. Islam isn't about study of text & interpretation by the masses, it's about obedience. Thus it's "pot-luck" as to what the imam teaches.
Try reading & studying the Qur'an, viz: http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/
You might like to learn about the fatwahs & killings within Australia, viz Dr Makin Morcos in Mt Druitt in 1991. I remember it well - my mum's murder case was being heard when he was killed. Also the 'alleged' threats against Rev Fayek ISKANDER in March 2004 by Muslim Farouk ALFRAKHANI at an Interfaith Meeting attended by the the Federal Attorney General. There are pages of incident, viz the Menai McDonalds Riot in 1998, et ali.

Cheers all

I have got a unique opportunity to gouge and embrace Australian multiculturalism to a point where understanding of its very segregating and divisive reality on a multi-nations country, where diversity is a good excuse for living apart.

Maybe, with no shadow of elementary forgiveness to Islamists, this is a case when keeping silence on obvious issue is a right path to any orthodoxy.

It doesn't work because everyone keeps complaining about it. It means you identify people by the way they look, what else is it? Where is all this culture btw?

So we get people complaining about being referred to as being "middle eastern appearance" when they are aboriginal even! Or middle eastern being labelled anglo saxon (as many are white). Or whites being labelled anglo saxon when it is not to the case. Heaven knows what mixed race race or real minority populations think their identity is.

If anyone thinks that multicultural policy has been a success and we have become more tolerant doesn't read much. Where do you ever read an article how wonderful it is to be part of Australia, how tolerant it is. The only message sent has been that is must be the worse country in the world to immigrate to. And this message has been sent worldwide.

Zilch positive feedback, maybe we should just face the truth. PC was the nail in the coffin.

Keith,

I like your views on Islam. Thank you for the link.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN ISLAM
JAN 30 2006 The Australian.
[Aziza Abdel-Halim, the only female member of the Prime Minister's Muslim Advisory Council, has warned that Islamic women are being "put down" by imams in hardline and moderate circles and their rights ignored.
"Women have suffered from sometimes ill-informed imams ... who have tried to put down women and negate some of their rights or activities," she said yesterday.
"And some of them (imams) have condoned men beating women, which is un-Islamic." ]

Its the last phrase which is curious.

How can something which is directly stated in the Quran be ‘un Islamic’ ?
If this shows nothing else, it shows that the level of ‘spin’ coming from “make it up as u feel” people in Islam.

If this was a Christian issue, and women were saying “Covering of female hair in Church meetings is UNChristian” it would be indirect conflict with the Bible.

Whether such a rule is rigidly enforced or not is a separate issue, but no one could come away from Pauls writings and claim it was ‘un’ Christian for females to cover the hair in Church. Yet this is the reasoning Aziza is using about Islam.

Here is another example of ‘spin’ from the Muslim Womens League

http://www.mwlusa.org/publications/positionpapers/violence.html

“Islam requires that husbands treat their wives with respect and it prohibits any form of physical or emotional abuse”

To be blunt, that is an outright lie! It’s not spin, because she is fully aware of the relevant verse shown below.

Well... lets look at the Quran and settle the issue.

[Sura 4:34 If you experience rebellion from the women, you shall first talk to them, then (you may use negative incentives like) deserting them in bed, then you may (as a last alternative) beat them.]

The most fascinating aspect of this verse, is the gymnastics undertaken by female Muslims to attempt to show how this ‘PROHIBITS’ domestic violence .... I just shake my head in bewonderment at that. Hmm Has feathers.. webbed feet.. a flat bill, goes ‘quack quack’... swims.. so.. its a ........ “Chicken” :)

I think Multiculturalism is okay, but not to the extent of changing the demographics/culture of the country.

Many people arrive in a country like Australia, for better life, better standards of living.. I think it's good to see it.

But, if they (immigrants) try to abuse the Australians and the host authorities tolerate them in the name of multiculturalism, then the trouble starts.

Well,I keep hearing of allthese supposed "benefits" of Multiculuralism, but what they are nobody sems to know. But I have thought a bit about the other side of the coin.

1. The impotation of Muslim terrorists who want to blow us all up. Cost to Australia for increased security, $1 billion dollars.

2. The creation of ethnic ghettoes with high rates of welfare dependency and very serious criminal behaviour. The cost of crime in Australia per annum was assessed by the AIC who put the figure at $32 billion a year. What proportion of that is due entirely to importing crime and violence prone ethnic groups is anybodies guess. The various ethnic associations sucessfully lobbied the Federal government in 1991 to prevent the ABS from keping these statistics because they were obviously embarrassed about what any statistical analysis would reveal.

3. Ethnic branch stacking of Labor Party branches and political parties pork barrelling ethnic voting blocks before Federal elections, which is a violation of the principle of democracy.

4. The importation of large numbers of people on working visas who are earning God-knows-what working in their fellow countrymen's sweatshops, restaurants and building sites.

5. The remittance of large amounts of Australian cash to families living overseas who hurts Australia's economy.

6. An unknown number of Australians killed by immigrants who's driving habits in Sydney have to be seen to be believed.

7. An explosion in serious drug abuse centred on the Vietnamese capitol of Cabrammatta.

8. Australia's first political assassination in Cabramatta, that of NSW MLA John Newman by a drug lord.

9. Race riots.

10. The gang rape of dozens of Australian girls by Muslim race hate rape packs.

That will do for starters. Anybody think of any other "benefits"?

Sage

Democracy isn’t limited in its expression to the ‘Ballot Box’. Input by joining political parties, writing articles for publication in Media, publicly expressing opinions, attending demonstrations, merely chatting with others or even rioting are acceptable by most as expressions of democracy…even though disrespectful Australians don’t think so, rioting is illegal. I think you’ll find following the amount of concern expressed in most quarters the issues currently highlighted in Sydney will be addressed by Governments and prospective Governments at the next couple of elections. That’s as it should be. As it’s always been. Multiculturalism has never been raised as an issue in such a fashion by Australians and hence Politicians have never had the need to address this issue in relation to immigration policies. They will now.

Little agreeable

You make an interesting point and it’s worth exploring. I think we are left to define multiculturalism to ourselves. That’s fine. It doesn’t impose a white Australian view. It accommodates alternative individualistic views. The official policy is a broad brush approach but is specific in defence of the existing culture.

Coach

Read the Official Policy and definition of Multiculturalism. The case in Victoria is very important.
Read the article By Dirk Moses, Pogrom Talk and the truncated debate I engaged him. It became obvious Dirk could not argue with my conclusion. Which was: Australia is not a racist country.
‘No-one is comfortable with difference’. Do you really believe that?

Alchemist.

I bet if you walked into one of those shops with money in your hand you’d find the signs outside of little relevance to the owner or you.
God (Hi Boaz) I would not ask Europeans an opinion on anything. If I was spending money they’d bend over backwards to appease me. Or they’d deny they ‘ave un problem. Or they’d simply look at me with a silly look and ask in their particular language what does Australia matter, as in their particular little principality, they're the centre of the universe and they have the answers. Or they’ll say
‘Australien? Wo ist das?’

Stone the crows it's the word count nazi.

For those who continue to gaze at the lodestar of multiculturalism, as a guide to an amicable relationship with Muslims who hate the mores of Western societies, and who are also false believers of multiculturalism, they will no longer be able to find it as it has already fallen into a blackhole.

Not only as an outcome of recent events in the UK and in the Netherlands, as well as the events in Cronulla, but, also, in the events of the early 90s, when Greeks and Slavo-Macedonians were burning each others Christian churches, and when each of these communities were becoming diplomatic posts of their respective governments trying to win the support of the Australian government for their cause.

Go to my blog: NEMESIS http://congeorgekotzabasis.blogspot.com

For those who haven't read this 66-page statement, written two years ago by professor of liguistics and Anglican priest Mark Durie, and provided here - (http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001307.php), it represents an exceptionally well researched and clearly written examination of the issues relating to Islam in Australia. I strongly urge everyone, including Muslims, to read it.

I first posted on this forum immediately following the protest and violence at Cronulla, Maroubra, etc. making it clear that I do not hate Muslims, despite being fully aware of the activities of the gangs made up primarily of youths of Lebanese Muslim heritage in Sydney over the past 10-15 years. I focused on the problem as a policing issue, in the light of former detective Tim Priest's article regarding the rise of Lebanese organised crime in Australia, specifically in Sydney, also written two years ago: http://www.quadrant.org.au/php/article_view.php?article_id=581

Up to this point I have rarely mentioned the issue of religion, but having read Mark Durie's 108 points and notes, I am now compelled to include the influence of Islamic teachings as a large part of the context within which the sensationally-dubbed 'race riots' occurred. This influence far exceeds the effects of Multiculturalism or immigration per se - the worst effects of immigration are clearly the impact on infrastructure, planning and the natural environment. CSIRO report on population, 'Future Dilemmas': http://www.cse.csiro.au/research/futuredilemmas/

To KRS1: Please read Professor Mark Durie's statement if you haven't already. What conclusions do you draw from it? Regarding Fred Nile, he is frequently attacked verbally and ridiculed about his ideas by many people. If anyone attempts even question any Muslim 'leader' however, they are immediately labelled such things as 'racist' or 'un-Australian' or 'intolerant'.

The cynical cartoons depicting Mohammed in newspapers in Denmark and Norway last week attracted outrage from Muslims across the globe, followed by boycotts of Danish products, whereas Islamic Jihad is waged daily, perpetually against non-Muslims everywhere guided by hateful doctrines. But the Danes and Norwegians apologise for fear of losing money and/or being targeted by terrorists, surrendering their right to free speech in the process. They have been successfully intimidated.

As an Atheist I believe the argument Christian effect is as bad as islamic effect on society is ridiculous.

If one wants to argue a Christian stand one is free lobby and defeat it, with out intimidation or labelling as a “racist” or a “bigot” Have you heard the word xtian-aphobe? I haven’t. The Christians take it on the chin, as do the Atheists, the New Agers,

If I get called a racist one more time for my view of islam or islamists I’m gonna scream… with laughter, its so incredibly stupid. Sadly for actual racial problems it’s done the call of racist in so badly that its almost unusable in real situations now. The new word is “reverse discrimination” it’s so real now that it’s in court and winning cases.

It’s secular and non-secular that is the problem, Christians made the leap years ago, islam has not.

As for multicult… islam broke it. Take it up with the Islamists not the West. The West bothered to think about it, give it ago, I truly believe most people tried. Islam smashed it to smithereens.

A while ago a poster made a point on enforced PC Style multicult and natural multicult, worth thinking on I reckon.

Muslim immigrants have never wanted to be part of Australia. Their country is Islam. I say this not out of hate but only how I perceive the situation.

Aha! Keith Kennelly is really Keith the Poster having two bites at the cherry. This explains his presumptuous, unsubstantiated and unschooled little piece.

Compared with the bios of other contributors, “Keith Kennelly was naturalised Australian in 1984” somehow doesn’t give readers the confidence that the writer is qualified to expound on any subject, including multiculturalism. Keith just gets a free kick.

Good luck to him. But he should stick to posting. A writer and informed expert on his subject he definitely is not.

Hi All

Mickijo (posted 3:02:39 PM 30/1/06)
Absolutely! The NSW Health Budget constraints affected 2 of my friends. Westmead (Sydney) Oncology had a $2m shortfall. They got the Chemotherapy but were discharged early.

Coach (posted 3:07:39 PM 30/1/06)
Thanks for defending Fred. I'm amazed at how many other so-called Christian politicians voted to lower "the age of consent" for sodomy - refer Hansard.
I don't always agree with Fred, but he's 'solid' - unlike 'whimpy' nominal Christians who criticise him.

Keith (posted 3:12:25 PM 30/1/06)
Mark DURIE is very skilled & insightful. NOT inciteful.

MichaelK (post 5:28:15 PM 30/1/06)
Please don't just give up. Fight against what you dislike. We need you.

Verdant (post 6:41:33 PM 30/1/06)
The verdict about multiculturalism is still 'out'. Gradually more people are beginning to realise its folly. But the "spin doctors" who espouse its virtues will continue to give it praise - they've help build the bureaucracy, the AMF, with its doctrines of misinformation.
The media rarely reports the truth. Many from overseas don't believe what's printed. Thousands still want to immigrate.
PC is a definite problem. We must oppose it. Tolerance to must become objective not subjective.

BOAZ_David (post 7:09:33 PM 30/1/06)
That Aziza Abdel-Halim thoughts or utterances should be in contravention of her own religious doctrines should come as no surprise. 1 Hadith 301 & 3 Hadith 826 explain Islamic demeaning of women succinctly. They are deficient in "intelligence", "religion" & "gratitude". Further, Ali quotes Muhammad as having said: "Women have 10 'awrat (external genitals). When she gets married her husgand covers one, & when she dies the grave covers all 10." 22 Hadith 858 & Vo 11Kitab Adab al-Nikah, p 65.
This, & others in support, are consider 'hassan' (approved) & 'sahih' (faultless).

Blessed (post 7:14:36 PM 30/1/06)
I don't wish to sound rude, but which part of the word "multicultural" didn't you understand? By definition 'multiculturalism' must be evolving in favour of those who are being added to the population - & doesn't favour the natural birthrate of 1.7. It must therefore be biased towards migrants.

Cheers all

This piece has attracted the usual small group of ratbags on their anti-immigration, anti-muslim rants. Really, these people both miss the point of the article and misunderstand multiculturalism, probably wilfully. Redneck, if you take the same jaundiced view of any group of people in Australia as you have, be they non- anglo migrants or generations-old anglo descendents, you could compile a similar list of the group's failures and shortcomings to yours, but you would only do so if you were prejudiced and wanted to put them down. It proves nothing to come up with a list like that. I could come up with a list of achievements and positive contributions that migrants have made. Such a list may support the immigration policy, but that is not the same as the multiculturalism in any case. Multiculturalism hasn't failed, it's just that such a policy cannot completely overcome prejudice and xenophobia.

Littleagreeable buddy, yours is the only post that contains any insights but your messages were truncated and garbled. Could you re-post and explain your experiences in more legible English?

No better life without a HIGHER income - no solution if segregation and devision on biological merits rules job market. Religious hatred is following. Mutual hatred.

Keith, Good on you for having a go! It reads well, - with an exception of your post to Ev. (Monday, 30 January 2006 3:12:25 PM)

• “the glaring exception must be the integration of Islam, since Islam is fundamentally opposed to the Australian nation. The self-proclaimed purpose of Islam is to establish a global, all-powerful Islamic state.'

• In the conclusion of my article I stated:
• 'I have concluded the above definition suits my multiculturalism and reflects the multiculturalism of most, but not all, Australians'
• The use of 'most, but not all' was alluding to exactly your conclusion.
• I have previously asked Muslim contributors to Online Opinion to supply their definition of Multi-culturalism. None has been forthcoming.”

I'd hardly call asking a few Muslim contributors to OLO representative of all Muslims - or rigorous research into deciphering what Muslims think multi-culturalism is - or is not.

And where would you have positioned their opinions in this article?

I doubt anyone would want to give opinions to you (are you a journalist?) to have them trampled over for a few cheap points.

While that good old trick of proclaiming ‘they didn’t respond to our inquiries’ is used by journo’s all the time (mostly on politicians) to reveal their guilt and avoidance- it just didn’t work for you. In fact it detracted from your overall approach to the topic.

And so one is left to ponder whether the objective of your piece was a means by which you (and Ev) could have a solipsistic little spray at Islam? I don't think it was, but it sure looks that way now.

PS. And you gotta get over your little chat with Dirk. While the exchange was interesting it was hardly an intellectual/academic fight to the death that changed the world forever. Regards. Rainier

Leigh…maaaate,

Perhaps you’d prefer the White Australia Policy? Then agitate for its return. I think you’d find most Australians prefer to think themselves not so intolerant. That policy represented our face to the world for many years. Multiculturalism takes that role now. I think you’d agree we have become more tolerant since WAP was dumped. More than 30 percent of our population have been born or have parents born overseas. That simple fact of mathematics makes us more embracing of and more comfortable with multiculturalism. While claims are made polls show Australians are anti-multiculturalist. . I think their concerns are much more focused on immigration policy than multiculturalism. I doubt they’d opt to return to the immigration policies of pre 1956.
I’m no economist but I think our immigration policies may have had a little influence upon our economy being able to produce a GDP of $369 billion dollars. I don’t agree we shouldn’t re-assess the sources of our immigration. I agree some of the spending on multiculturalism is likely targeted incorrectly and unfairly. Let the politicians know. Oh we’re doing that here, you say. There are other avenues as well.

Sydney? Where’s that? :-) See my comments to Sage.

Second Coming? Nahhhhh. I’ve always been here. Just call me Zeus!

I are not offput buy yous comment about my inability to have a thoughtful opinion and to write as good as I think I can. I think that is the way its not always bin in Australia. I think yous should ave bin a bit tolerable towards my ignorance and presumptioning.
I didn’t see you exclaimin in surprise when Andrew or Dirk done what yous criticial about me for doin. Are you always so lopseyed in yous attitudes?
Beside not being correct gramner and spellin, I can’t read neither. Is this bettor?

Friedrich

Careful mate, you might come to agree with my views on immigration and multiculturalism.

PK

The post by Ev was also insightful, and well worth your unbiased assessment.

Little Agreeable Buddy.

I concur. That piece of work is the most important piece on Islam in Australia.

Rainier, you said: 'And so one is left to ponder whether the objective of your piece was a means by which you (and Ev) could have a solipsistic little spray at Islam?'
Please explain how the objective of a piece can be a means by which something else is done. Could you also please explain what you mean by 'solipsistic little spray at Islam?'. I don't know Keith nor have I ever communicated with him. Also I am not a solipsist.

Here is an excellent free online book entitled 'How to Speak and Write Correctly': http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext04/hwswc10h.htm
An excerpt from the book: 'To use a big word or a foreign word when a small one and a familiar one will answer the same purpose, is a sign of ignorance. Great scholars and writers and polite speakers use simple words.'
The author also writes: '..you may not be content to call things by their common names; you may be ambitious to show superiority over others and display your learning or, rather, your pedantry and lack of learning. For instance, you may not want to call a spade a spade. You may prefer to call it a spatulous device for abrading the surface of the soil. Better, however, to stick to the old familiar, simple name that your grandfather called it.'

Is anyone out there willing to explain how the teachings of Islam are compatible with Multiculturalism as defined by the Australian Government - the definition shown in the article?

Keith, can you please provide a source for that definition?. (ie. which Government document or website?)

I would like to correct two mistakes I made in my last post - First, the cartoons of Mohammed were printed by the Danish newspaper 'Jyllends-Posten' on September 30 last year. Second, the Danish Government has not apologised for the cartoons, citing freedom of the press. However the paper did apologise.

Depictions of Mohammed are prohibited by Islamic law. The illustrators have received numerous death threats. Islamic countries do not have freedom of the press.

Ev,

Apologies for the word solipsistic (* that the self is the only existent thing -English is my second language so I tend to use whatevers appears to be appropriate.) I learn better soon for you miss.

But then you completely confuse me by calling out to someone else to “’explain how the teachings of Islam are compatible with Multiculturalism”.

Why not have a go yourself

Redneck there are lots of positive imputs to immigration.I know many Greeks ,Italians ,Indians,some Lebanese ,Chinese who have a great work ethic and are honest citizens.Our flawed immigration programme however has not determined good citizens because of the PC United Nations guidelines that equates all our Global citizens to be of equal value.The argument should be about the degree of social change that the predominate European culture can handle,rather than measuring our tolerance by their perception our racism.

Multi culturism only works if the immigrants are reasonably intelligent and willing to assimilate.Our immigration programme has been found to be seriously wanting.

This is where our own Present Liberal Govt has flawed policies.They will take anyone under the banner of UN classified oppressed political refugees

Hi All

oldpro5 (post 4:03:08 PM 30/1/06)
How did I miss you? Sorry!
The new nations? That's revealing! Just look at the multiculturalism there in action - Indonesia, constant uprisings & terrorism aplenty; countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt & its Middle East neighbours; the multiple African nations. Need I continue? Thousands of people being tortured & massacred daily/weekly.
As you suggest, Greece is a European example of where multicultualism ISN"T practised. They have very strick rules for entry & residency. They fervently recall the end of the Byzantine Empire. They remember the oppression & wars, so they reject what history has shown them isn't in their best interest.
For the Greeks who don't like Greece: there's always Melbourne.

Redneck (post 7:27:45 PM 30/1/05)
I'm not an advocate of the American "redneck principle", but Redneck your list is comprehensively correct.
I'd forgotten about John NEWMAN. He was a nice guy - & good martial artist. The murder of GP Dr Makin Morcos in April 1991at Mt Druitt was another case of 'silencing' dissent again Islamic 'corruption'.
Few benefits of multiculturalism to Australia are evident when we holistically view the results.

Keith (post 7:46:34 PM 30/1/06)
Your response & belief that, ".. we are left to define multiculturalism to ourselves. That’s fine.", isn't fine at all! We ought to have had a clear immoveable definition in the first place. Humanities failings are only further exemplified when no boundaries are set. That is "relativism" which, whilst appearing to be conciliatory, only creates conflict as people redefine the non-defined.

Thernistocles (post 7:54:38 PM 30/106)
Hear, hear!

Ev (post 10:21:21 PM 30/1/06)
Thank you for elevating the wisdom of Marl DURIE.
Muslim apologetics is rampant amongst the compliant PC-set. There is sufficient ignorance amongst the populace without social leaders showing weakness in the face of adversity.

Meredith (post 1:57:00 AM 31/1/06)
Your comment, "Christians made the leap years ago, islam has not." is prophetic but current. Nor can Islam change at its 'heart' - its doctrines & dogma won't let it.

Friedrich (post 6:29:09 AM 31/1/06)
Your perception is sadly a reality.

Cheers all

Ev

The omission of the reference in the original article was an oversight.

http://www.immi.gov.au/multicultural/australian/index.htm

Thanks for the correction.

I think Arjay is close to the mark. I would argue that Australia needs immigration, not to have it would see us atrophy as a post-colonial outpost instead of the vibrant, innovative society and economy we need to be. We can take the best from overcrowded countries where opportunity is limited and here they will find boundless opportunity if they are willing to live in peace and prosperity. None of us want immigrants to import troubles from back home. Immigrants who bring professional or business skills and who raise children to be successful members of our society make a great social and economic contribution. Anyone who denies that or wants to concentrate on negatives is simply prejudiced. If we are to have immigration, we need some sort of guidelines so that people are encouraged to live in harmony. It isn't perfect of course, but it is better than the 'good old days' when naked prejudice was routinely shown to migrants. People nowadays know that is not on, and that's a big improvement in my view. Those contributors to this forum who sneer at PC seem to be saying 'we want to be able to call a wog a wog'. Is that right or not?

Keith,

No. I don’t prefer the White Australia Policy, and have never said that I do. Multiculturalism has been occurring naturally since the demise of that system and needs no urging or special favours. If that makes me intolerant in your eyes, so be it. Like all those of your persuasion, you are very keen on minority figures. “More than 30% of our population have been born or have parents born overseas”. Big deal. The vast majority – 70% are native born. And, I don’t think you are in any position to decide what “we” are comfortable about. Remember, you are seeing the situation as a non-native. You came to Australia and Australia adopted you as one of ours. Despite PC opinions, it is impossible to remove, in any country, that small touch of resentment felt when migrants start telling the locals how they feel or should feel – or anything else, for that matter.

You are right, in my case at least: I am far for concerned about immigration than I am about the make up of immigrants themselves. And I do make that clear in other quarters. Obviously, though, it doesn't have any effect.

You certainly don’t need to be put off by my comment. I’m not attempting to gag anyone, but I will express my opinions, not of fellow posters, but of any ‘outsider’ (which you were in this case) who tries to persuade me by writing an article. Despite my criticism, you still don’t seem to understand how many people see multiculturalism, and that the main gripe is the unwanted, undemocratic, and highly political and divisive system nobody (including migrants) ever asked for. So nothing changes.

Fair enough. It was worth a try. Viva democracy, eh? I just hope we can hang onto it.

Regards

There seems to be some confusion here where people talk about the supposed economic benefits of immigration. There is a distinction between the size of the whole cake (GNP) and the size of an average slice (GNP per capita), as well as issues about how the cake is distributed. Clearly GNP per capita is what matters to most people, i.e. one would rather be an average citizen in Denmark than China, even though China has a bigger GNP. There is NO correlation between GNP per capita and immigration and population growth among the developed countries. You can see this for yourselves from figures in the CIA World Factbook. There is a correlation for Third World countries, but it is negative: higher population growth means more poverty. This is also consistent with the recently released Productivity Commission draft report on immigration, and with a number of other studies in the US and elsewhere. (See the website of the Center for Immigration Studies (www.cis.org).)

What high population growth does do, and why the rich love it, is change the income distribution within a country. Prof. George Borjas (of the Harvard Economics Dept., www.borjas.com) has found that a 10% increase of the labour supply in a particular type of job results on average in a 3-4% cut in real wages. Great if you are the employer. Not so great if you are the poor working stiff.

You might ask yourselves why wages went up in the US and the economy continued to grow strongly when immigration was mostly shut off in 1921. Why is the US minimum wage worth less in real terms than in 1960? Why has the US median wage was been falling for the past 5 years, even though productivity is up by 15%? (See the website of the Economic Policy Institute (www.epinet.org).) Why is Finland number one on the World Economic Forum Competitiveness Index even though if has a population growth rate of only 0.16% and net immigration of 0.89 per thousand, as opposed to 3.91 in Australia?

Liegh quote:

"Despite my criticism, you still don’t seem to understand how many people see multiculturalism, and that the main gripe is the unwanted, undemocratic, and highly political and divisive system nobody (including migrants) ever asked for."

You say this often to support whatever barrow you're pushing (well it’s the old rickety but with a different load) - but you provide absolutely no evidence to back this up. While support for Multiculturalism has waned over the years I believe it still highly supported by the majority of Australians.

This poll certainly confirms my assertion:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17639227%255E29277,00.html

This poll also points out that the perception of racism in Australia have remained unchanged since 1997, when 44 per cent said they believed the nation was racist.

This is certainly more accurate than what appears to be your own reports on societal attitudes – that one can only assume – are gleaned from your morning walks to the corner shop.

Keith, I reckon you could have used these newspoll stats in your article to great effect

Keith,

I don't think I will ever embrace multiculturalism, none the less you put a good case for.

Cheers

Leigh

‘You are right, in my case at least: I am far for concerned about immigration than I am about the make up of immigrants themselves. And I do make that clear in other quarters. Obviously, though, it doesn't have any effect.’
I’d say it is having quite an effect in many quarters. We have a similar sentiment on this issue.
I think you are right too. Most liberal-minded people think and argue in a similar vein.

I misquoted that figure. I often make mistakes through lapses of memory. It is in fact 43% not 30%.

‘ And, I don’t think you are in any position to decide what “we” are comfortable about. Remember, you are seeing the situation as a non-native. You came to Australia and Australia adopted you as one of ours.’

I just wonder how indigenous people feel about this statement. Did you include those people in your ‘native-born’ class? Or could they equally say to you:

‘I don’t think you are in any position to decide what “we” are comfortable about….’

Rainier
Is this an example of the sort of thing you mean?
(Thanks for the Newspoll link. Interesting. It contradicts some of what I've said.)

We will all thrive with our democracy.

• Keith Kennelly, yes, whatever angle you take its helpful to rely on some current research data. This allows you to layer your perspective around what you want to say. I'd be willing to help out in your next one if you like.

• You asked Leigh “I just wondering how indigenous people feel about this statement. Did you include those people in your ‘native-born’. Hypothetically, if you and Leigh were invited to a function where you would be confronted by a room full of Indigenous people (including myself), the one who felt more uncomfortable and who would leave first is least Australian. My money would be on Leigh rudely turning down the invite.

Thanks for your article Keith. Interesting.

On the topic of Indigenous Australians, you say: "One of the "hidden" benefits is how we look at our Indigenous people. This has changed for most of us over the last 30 years. I would assert that our evolving acceptance of the diversity of immigration has heightened our awareness and acceptance of Indigenous people and their diversity".

Whilst I have recognised a shift in the perception of Indigenous people in mainstream Australia, this is not the important question. The important question should be, how has the plight of our Indigenous people changed, and has there been benefit? Lets see -Education rates remain low. Health and mortality rates are shocking. Gross over-representation in prisons and disproportionate deaths in custody', and a culture of violence continues to plague those Indigenous people who are in what I call 'limbo'. They have endured forced assimilation and now live in urban areas, and are trying desperate to reconcile that with the need to hold on to their culture, traditions and spirituality, and attempting to pass it on to the future generations.

You can see the result is places like West Dubbo, Bourke, and even Redfern.

Now recently Indigenous Australians lost their national voice – ATSIC. With allegations about its individual operation aside, no Australia can, at least in my opinion, argue against the merits of our Indigenous people having a national voice.

The system of native title remains almost impossible to navigate, when you consider the operation of the Act and the cost involved in drawn-out litigation.

Whilst I acknowledge there have been some positive developments, like circle sentencing in Dubbo and the Sth Coast, I think to say that our heightened ‘awareness & acceptance of Indigenous people’ is positive, whilst being factually true, is perhaps over simplistic and missing of the point

Summarizing, emigration is to be OK if immigrants are being kept on the verges of a “mainstream society”, not pretending on jpbs supposed for a higher race.

It is time the 1951 agreement on refugees was cancelled. The world has moved on and the refugees of today are a totally different category.
We do not need the UN interfering in our migration scheme.
No migrants should be permitted into our country unless they understand and agree to abide by Australian laws and customs.
There should also legislation that would ensure any second generation citizen who refuses to abide by Australian laws and customs, lose Australian citizenship and be liable to repatriation to where they originally came from.
We must stop the cancer of haters who have migrated here and who add nothing but strife to our land. We do not need them.

Rainier

I think jkenno's criticism fair and apt. I was simplistic but I don't think I missed his point. I simply didn't explore it. I'd enjoy and like a collaboration on expressing thoughts on that topic. Would you be interested?

Keith

Keith, Yeah, why not. Contact GY, he knows me.

jkenno, been meaning to say for a while now how much i appreciate your style and approach, too deadly, thanks bro.

mickijo,

I agree with all your points except for two:

1. "It is time the 1951 agreement on refugees was cancelled." while it is understandable why "We do not need the UN interfering in our migration scheme." we are still humans and must remain compassionate to our (genuine) fellow humans.

2. "We must stop the cancer of haters who have migrated here and who add nothing but strife to our land. We do not need them."

True. I agree fully - my question is HOW can we successfully do that? the cancer is already present and is spreading. It is difficult to isolate it into one location to extract it wholly. When touched, it wriggles and squirms then multiplies and establishes itself in other locations…

Any ideas?

JKENNO

you might have missed my post in another thread.. regarding Indigenous Australians.

You said:

[Education rates remain low. Health and mortality rates are shocking. Gross over-representation in prisons and disproportionate deaths in custody', and a culture of violence continues to plague those Indigenous people ]

One Indigenous person from Torres Straits was interviewed about the violence and problems. He came up with probably the single most profound summary of the root cause I've heard in all my days.

"You want us to dance like warriors, but not act like them"

Behind the richness of meaning of this statement, is the root of pretty much all male Aboriginal problems. The rest, such as you mentioned are merely 'symptoms'.

Without addressing that root cause, you can throw all the education, health care, welfare and tuppaware at Aboriginal people and it will do squat.

Politicians will wax eloquent about 'Allocation of funds, Early intervention, Health programs etc'.. its a load of tripe. "Pasty Makeup" to disguise the lack of inner character in the approach to Aboriginal plight.

But its not just the Aboriginal people who need to be addressed at their inner person, it is also we non Aboriginals. Somehow, we have to get passed the cultural/social gap, and our own sense of cultural superiority (which in most cases it is, in regard to our attitudes towards Aboriginals) and interact with them in ways that promote their dignity, self respect and sense of purpose and being as Aboriginals and Australians.

Hi All

Leigh (post 9:48:03 AM 31/1/06)
Give Keith the benefit of the doubt. He hasn't opposed anything that I've yet said. I hope that he's not too apologetic. We have enough of that with Professor Gary BOUMA & his friend May HELOU! I think that he understands.
(31/106)

PK (posted 12:57:36 PM 31-1/06)
Thanks for comment on substance. But, truncated? Garbled? I hope that others aren't likewise finding my writings difficult to comprehend.
Our capacity is 350 words, & that's tough. Abbreviation is necessary to comply with limitations, yet respond to most points.
I re-concur: I'm opposed to multiculturalism but a proponent of multi-ethnicity. I'd hate to see Sydney forced to accept the Pamploma bulls around Mrs Macquarie's Chair (Sydney), a fox hunt through Kurrajong or a Hajj to Airs Rock.
(31/1/06)

Rainier (post 2:23:12 PM 31/1/06)
Sorry. I missed the purpose of your comments. Maybe it's me?
(31/1/06)

Keith (post 4:04:18 PM 31/1/06)
Hope that you & Leigh can "bury the hatchet" - preferably not in each other's back. We all have an important issue which requires focussed deliberation.
(31/1/06)

Ev (post 9:45:35 PM 31/1/06)
Hope you're not a solipsist. I didn't detect it in previous postings.
The best site for "multiculturalism" is:
www.amf.net.au
Run by the Australian Multicultural Foundation headed by Has DELAL. Professor Gary BOUMA is a 'board' member. Good old "Gazza". He was a "key witness" against Catch the Fire Ministries (CTFM) in the VCAT Case # A392/2002 by the Islamic Council of Victoria (ICV). Gary gave inaccurate information (according to the Summation) in his testimony - as an Anglican priest he misquoted Scripture & an ill-informed, incompetent judge made determinations based upon wrong information.
You could also go to:
www.immi.gov.au/multicultural/australian/index.htm , but I think that the former site is better.
But don't bother questioning the drivel contained in the AMF documentation though. They'll only send you another 'hardcopy' of the text from where you raised the complaint. They aren't interested in any questions.
Thank you for correcting your 'minor' error.
(1/2/06)

Cheers all

Hi all

Rainier (post 11:08:38 PM 31/1/06)
Islamic teachings aren't compatible with multiculturalism unless all other cultures ignore their own heritage & values. That's the 'problem'.
As previously stated: I'm not a multiculturalism advocate. Having a taco at the local El Rancho is far removed from enduring (for instance) the Pamplona bulls racing through Mrs Macquarie's Chair (Sydney) just to appease some "nutter" asserting his democratic cultural rights.
The Aussi BBQ with lamb chops? Halal meats, or a vegetarian conglomeration is OK. Multiculturalism is too divisive. It was ill-defined in the first place.
(31/1/06)

Arjay (post 11:21:49 PM 31/1/06)
Very accurate appraisal. The 'problem' began with the Whitlam Government. The "flood-gates were opened" without adequate background checks. We needed workers. We invited anyone.
The current government is following UN protocols because they are deceived - like the population.
Like you, I have many friends from diverse racial backgrounds. They're proud Australians. Their heritage is only a vestige of their past.
(1/2/06)

PK (post 9:47:42am 1/2/06)
PC stifles truth & honesty. However, honesty oughtn't to be shrouded in disrespect.
I can say to Mick MUNDINE (Aboriginal Housing Association, Redfern) things that former Sydney Lord Mayor & MP Frank SARTOR could never say. Mick wouldn't claim vilification. I occasionally joke with some of Mick's cohorts, & they've said to me, "You silly 'whitey'.". I wasn't offended - I'm white & they're black.
What ought to offend the individual is the noun commonly used which describes a woman's genitals. The offending word amonst Muslims is "'awrah" (Arabic). That's what Mohammad called all women, when, according to Ali (his cousin & father-in-law) he said "Women have ten 'awrah. When she gets married the husband covers one, & when she dies the grave covers the ten." 22 Hadith # 858, &; Vol II, Kitab Abad al-Nikah, p 65. That's offensive.
I'm just as proud of my 'whiteness' as I am of my non-white friends with their colour. But we shouldn't pretend that we're the same (in colour).
(1/2/06)

Cheers all

Keith – I understand fully that you didn’t explore that point in your article. But I just think it is dangerous to imply much positiveness about the interaction of mainstream Australia with our Indigenous peoples and their overall plight.

Ta Rainer. The feeling is obviously mutual.

BD – I totally agree with you (which is weird to say). The root of the problem is perfectly encapsulated by what that man said. I most definitely do not advocate throwing money at the problem, as it obviously does not work. I guess it is relevant to this subject because it is a multi-cultural issue. Indigenous people have been caught in the middle of a huge dichotomy – first white Australia forces them to assimilate, and now we say, no, keep your culture, but on our terms of course. What result did they expect?

L.A.B – I’m not quite sure of your point. You seem to be opposed to multiculturalism, which is why I find your last quote strange. You say: “I'm just as proud of my 'whiteness' as I am of my non-white friends with their colour. But we shouldn't pretend that we're the same” – I agree, but isn’t that an argument in favour of multiculturalism??

As for your point about Mick Mundine, I find any argument in favour of identifying someone by the colour of their skin abhorrent. Its simply not necessary. After all, we don’t want to descend into a desensitising of offensive language, similar to what has happened to the word ‘nigger’ in the US and beyond. That’s probably why Mick called on Sartor to resign straight away. Although I do acknowledge this was probably also for the reason that ‘big Frank’ wants to level the block and bring the developers in.

I know indigenous people who don't give a damn about all the rubbish that people like Mick Mundine go on with. They get on with life. They work, pay taxes and like a beer. Some are very angry with the Catholic Church. They are angry with the way they were taken from their family as children which is quite understandable.I've socialised with these people on rare occasions and they don't carry on. They don't spend all day crying and they don't face Mecca. They rise above bulldust.

We all know Arjay blames Gogh for everything from ingrown toenails to global warming. It’s his chosen role in life.

My research (which is more concise than Pauline Hanson’s maiden speech) on the history of immigration and multicultural policy contends that with the abolishment of the WAP (1966) policy became much more flexible.

Whitlam merely mirrored this abolishment in policy (references to race) but reduced the overall intake of immigrants in his term in office.

The increase in number and percentage of migrants from non-European countries did not take place until after the Fraser government came into office in 1975 and immigration levels remained high in Hawke and Keating years.

We have yet to have a national debate about population and environmental stability, a call that I would whole heartedly support.

This is very different from a return call to the sentiments expressed in the WAP I see being expressed covertly and overtly here.

Environmental sustainability is more than green environmentalism - is also about the social and cultural environment in the present and the future.

The shift from fears about Asian immigration (Howard and Hanson) in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s to a fear about Muslim immigration needs to be understood more holistically.

But this gets lost in the rush to demonize Muslims. Instead what we witness here is a white terror, fueled by media coverage of wars and anti-Muslim & pro-American propaganda.

Cronulla was just a symptom of larger anxiety politicians such as Howard avoids addressing as it means he may have to develop a real -not politically- opportunistic- vision for this nation.

While many here do not condone racism, they nonetheless are blinded to how racism is now an affective technology used by politicians and their media mates. Dogs that get whistled often don’t know they’ve been whistled at all. They just obey.

Jkenno, I’m totally over discussing Indigenous issues with BD. He invariably wants to psycho-analyze us / me on his couch – books by Siggy Freud, Margi Meade and of course the Gideon close at hand. I’d rather swallow a bucket of poison

For goodness sake.

Cronulla is fresh in our minds. The theology of Islam is commented on in here and the conclusion is negative. These two events occur close together in time. One must have caused the other.

The Cronulla event caused the negative evaluation of the theology of Islam.

Why not, instead of reasoning this way, reason yourself about what Islam really is. That way you can once and for all get rid of these 'Muslim demonisers'.

Otherwise don't bloody comment. C'mon people.

Just read the pdf file on this link.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/001307.php

People who are critical of Islam as a religion are not engaging in white terror, racism or some other ludicrous thing.

I would love Islam to be a superior religion.

I would gladly exchange the septic, sex obsessed, materialistic, soulless, parts of our culture, for some decent dogma. Dogma that includes God, truth, beauty. Instead of this "meaning in denial" crap, nihilism, anomie and "pleasure is the greatest good" dogma.

But Islam doesn't fit the bill, it demands to and will throw out all our lovely tolerance in a second. The fruits of western christian history will go as soon as Sharia is able. Have no illusions.

Hitler dispensed with democracy as soon as he was democratically elected. The weak Weimar republic was cast aside.

Look, a white highly civilised country with a history of producing great theologians was seduced. Why might the Muslims be any different? They are being given the opportunity by a weak secular west that is losing touch with its religious raison d'etre. It can't handle the primal force that is Islam without the shield of faith in Christ.

The evidence is in Europe now. All one has to do is connect religious text with behaviour of those who live according to it in the world right now.

*shrug*

Martin,

Hitler was right in getting rid of democracy. He rebuilt Germany.That cannot be denied. Also that he turned into the personification of pure evil cannot be denied.

Islam is a vicious evil religion(Nick Griffin). Nick got off on two out of four charges. Dare I say Nick Griffin for Prime Minister. Yes I dare.

Fredrich - and i now hundreds of Indigenous people who do care about the work mick is doing for their housing in and around Redfern. I don't see how any of his work can be considered rubbish (but, as usual, you your generalising finds a way eh!)

Mick is not about merely helping someone you know 'get on with life'. These leaders of the Indigenous community are about helping the entire community, fundamentally by improving the conditions which they live in. It is about encouraging respect, about improving outlook and creating ambition. Rubbish indeed.

Hi all

Leigh (post 9:49:13AM 1/2/06)
I concur with you - though I mightn't have expressed it quite the same way.
I don't support multiculturalism at all now. I certainly wouldn't have supported mc for all the years that I did - I helped co-ordinate major Australia-wide events throughout the 90s - if I'd known what I now know. I don't know even 1 of over 200 'new' Australian friends who supports the concept. My former-wife's uncle, a Croat by birth, is vocally opposed. He was an Aussie from the moment that he began work at the Snowy Mountains just after arriving in Australia.
(2/2/06)

Divergence (post 1:47:39 PM 1/2/06)
Thank you!
(2/2/06)

Rainier (post 3:56:45 PM 1/2/06)
Great swathes of the population call themselves Christians, too. But when you get into inquiring conversation some of them think that it's about Santa.
With multiculturalism not being accurately defined at inception & being allowed to evolve, few could actually define what it means now.
If multiculturalism includes the embracing of legal protocols, then Muslims have the right to say, "Well you want my halal kebabs, & you allow us to build our mosques. Our women can freely wear the Chador. Why do you stop us from having our Sharia marriage rights?" In fact, there have already been two deputations to the Federal Attorney General in that regard - 1998 & 2003 (from memory). I have the documents of those appeals stored away in 'hardcopy'. The delegates were denied their submission on both occasions.
If/when successful, where do the boundaries of statutorial change cease?
(2/2/06)

Freidrich (post 6:42:54 PM 1/2/06)
Well that you, myself, Corel (my ex's uncle) & millions of other silent constituents seek integration should not surprise us.
(2/2/06)

Keith (post 7:12:37 PM 1/2/06)
Heh, you admit that you made a mistake & that you're willing to change your views. [I didn't say that I disagreed, though.] You're the type of person that we need in government. Can you tell me the suburb that you live in? - I'll move there. Next election I'll vote for you.
(2/2/06)

Cheers all

LittleAgreeableBuddy, The policy of Multiculturalism is just that, a policy, not a law -something many here deliberately confuse when on their soap boxes about Islam and Muslims.

I believe in good civil laws and human rights with sufficient flexibility to respect and protect cultural diversity and human integrity.

This reflects a good approach to the shrinking human world we live in.

If there are practices that do not fit within contemporary notions of civility and respectability then these should be dealt with by laws and the policies that they give birth to.

The right to religion and culture is limited at the point at which it infringes on another human rights (between and within) given cultures.

Are you advocating for the right to infringe simply on the hypothetical predictions you put forward - or something more substantial (evidence

jkenno,

Your post was pure jkenno.

Littleagreeablebuddy.

Vote for me? Not likely. I decided quite sometime ago a political career wouldn't make me at all happy. I was persuaded by the words of Lord Morely who said.

'Politics is a field where action is one long second-best, and where the choice constantly lies between two blunders.'

I simply prefered people not to be so sure I was a blunderer.

Regards

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,251-2023462,00.html

OOO boy what have the Idiots done to us. War seems to be back on the Agenda. Multi-destructuralism and we got it.
Only a few angry faces upset about a war criminal and pedophile, who would have thought a cartoon could upset so many peace loving Moslems.
Says more about them than our Left like to admit. It is to late .

Hi all

jkenno (post 2/2/06)
My former father-in-law used to hire about 40 jackaroos for his property near Brewarrina in the 1960s. He'd only hire full-blacks -apart from other nationalities. 70% were Aboriginals. I met quite a few of those gentlemen in the 1980s. They all praised father-in-law. He treated them as equals to himself. They ate the family food.
In the 70s I asked my father-in-law why he would only hire full-blacks. His answer was pretty simple: "They're the only ones prepared to work. If I hire a quarter-caste he'll disappear within a few days. Whiteman's influence."
Today Brewarrina is like "a ghost town". "Pip's Milkbar"? Kids hurried to get a milkshake in a metal container with a straw. Now? Bars & shutters on windows.
Notwithstanding, Europeans rarely made integration appealing to our Indigenous brothers. We expected they'd become instant 'little whities'. The American Negros were treated worse.
Conjecturally we're more advanced in our 'treatment' of this issue - compared to most other nations. That's no consolation. One mis-spent dollar or life lost is one too many. But integration is nonetheless important to our unity as a nation.
(2/2/06)

Mickijo (post 4:11:27 PM 2/2/06)
You've got it in 5 succinct paragraphs.
(2/2/06)

Coach (post 8:48:01 PM 2/2/06)
You're "spot on".
Sadly, we haven't listened to people like ex-policeman Tim PRIEST & other "whistle-blowers". In NSW we must give police the support that they deserve in enacting the 'new' powers that they have - powers removed by NSW Attorney General Frank WALKER in about 1986. Law enforcement isn't a "service" - it's a force.
Magistrates & the ombudsmen must be accountable & held accountable. There ought not to be some 273 chances - as in the case recently reported where a recidivist continued to ignore the judiciary, & they once again granted bail. We send the wrong message to the disrespectful potential law-breakers.
(2/2/06)

Cheers all

Hi all

BOAZ_David (post 9:01:41 PM 2/2/06)
You're right. But how come some Aboriginals can become politicians, lawyers & leaders within society whilst others sit back & complain? The answer might be found in the "whiteman ghettos" of self-imposed welfare dependence, where thirds-generation Anglo-Saxons riot, commit crime & refuse to comply with their responsibilities towards vast majority of hard-working Australian citizens. Much is to do with attitudes & with society itself not making unwarranted excuses for the dysfunctional element.
(3/2/06)

jkenno (post 8:50:55 AM 3/2/06)
Your question: ".. isn’t that an argument in favour of multiculturalism??" NO! It's an argument for multi-racialism. There is a difference.
Why do you find the identification of someone, according to their skin-colour, abhorrent? As I hinted, I have about 20 Aboriginal friends in Redfern & probably about the same number elsewhere. None of them are ashamed of their aboriginality. Why should I be? One of my closest friends in Redfern is a minister & he jokingly says to me things like, "I'm only a black-fella." I'm likely to respond, "But what a black-fella!"
As to Frank Sartor: Mick wasn't going to call on Minister Sartor to resign. [I know. I discussed it with him.] However, Frank Sartor had been such an obsteporous mongrel over many years, & many of Mick's associates were calling for Frank's head. The desire to level "The Block" was certainly part of it. Frank Sartor is despised in Redfern - not that Clover Moore is much-liked either.
(3/2/06)

Friedrich (post 10:28:33 AM 3/2/06)
Certainly not everyone agrees with Mick. What's unusual about disagreement?
Mick isn't a Catholic. He's a Protestant - unlike Anthony, his nephew (Muslim as you know).
The Catholic Church has much to answer for. But that was a different era. Several of those affected who live on The Block don't hold grudges for what occurred more than 30-years ago. Some of those are Catholics still, some want nothing to do with formalised religion, & some are still traumatised.
The fewer who face Mecca the better!
(3/2/06)

Cheers all

jkenno, lucky you!

jkenno and Rainier,

Your love of Islam is refreshing. I've never known any other aborigines that have shown an interest in "the' faith. You are indeed free thinkers. How long do you think it will take to catch on?

Well that's about it, I'm off to buy a yellow suit four sizes too big and a Jack Johnson hat. I'm de man.

Everytime I think about Aborigines and (muslims)Arabs,I can't help but to hold some inner bitterness towards them.When I read stories like this (even though I know its not the right way to be):

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/no-racial-motive-for-bashing-police/2006/02/01/1138590531524.html

http://forum.mg.co.za/showthreaded.php?Number=401935
-
Alot of these folks look, and act just like europeans,yet most of the time they are the victims etc,etc , but yet still are deeply racist themselves.Only their foreign non-native europeans parents,wives,husband, can be excepted into real australians society(its what they really want)not all.Its their privilage,who knows who are the racist genocidal europeans, and who are the oppressed natives nowadays ,who can tell?.Still have alot of respect for them as humans,just don't have the compassion anymore.

Hi all

Martin ibn Warriq (post 1:15:44 PM 3/2/06)
A good post.
The hyperlink is similar to other good articles about Mark DURIE - just a bit stronger.
The VCAT case # A392/2002, ICV vs CTFM is a disgrace. Judge Michael HIGGINS' "Summation" should render him incapable of fulfilling his duties. I found 27 errors on my first read - there are over 106 mistakes. On a per-page basis, that's a 75.71% failure rate by His (dis)Honour. Why can't we enact Section 72 (ii)?
(3/2/06)

Friedrich (post 1:38:28 PM 3/2/06)
No one could praise anything that Hitler did. Yes, he re-built Germany, but at a huge cost - to the approximately 20 neighbouring countries, the world generally, & his own people. In human cost it was in excess of 50-million killed & unknown millions disfigured. 6-million Jews alone died.
(3/2/06)

jkenno (post 2:27:34 PM 3/2/06)
As said to Friedrich (above reply to him) not everyone will like Mick. Some don't like me. Many who don't like him oppose his anti-drugs stance. I'd suggest that the majority 'love' him.
I haven't seen him for a while - the last time was at a function in Parliament House. He received an award. A contingent of local residents was there. His speech was very humble.
(3/2/06)

Keith (post 7:58:14 PM 4/2/06)
You sound like South Australia's Peter DANIELS. He would've made a wondeful politician - just not interested, & too wise.
(5/2/06)

All- (post 8:22:52 PM 4/2/06)
Now there's a 'new' word. But not a new concept.
Criminals are "a dime a dozen", that's why there's apathy. Whatsmore, the concentration-spance of the 'average' human is short - they forget. Who was that dingo again? Hitler? Who's he? Additionally humans (Westerners) feel disempowered. They introvertedly remain silent, whilst gathering wealth & life's pleasures.
Not so the Muslim. He's a"nationalist" within his religion. Offend Allah, Muhammad or the Muslim's brother & you offend all Muslims. Offend a "Westerner" & you often get the answer, "Well, who gives a s*t?!"
Maybe that's our problem? Lack of passion? Meanwhile, Usama has it (passion).
(5/2/06)

Cheers all

“Freddy” – I honestly don’t know why you bother posting. Must have a lot of free time to ‘stew’ over your bigotries eh big fella!

L.A.B – like I said, I don’t see any point in identifying people by skin colour. I understand that it often does not have a racial undertone, but why do we have to descend into such generalities? Hey, its just my opinion dude, I’m not going to judge how you relate to people, and its not like I haven’t heard and seen it all before. But I don’t think my opinion in anyway means I believe anyone should be “ashamed” of their ethnicity. If anything, it means the reverse.

As to your comparison with the treatment of our Indigenous people with other countries, I see little point. I also see little point in saying that we are in any way “advanced in out treatment”, seeing the plethora of negatives, which you do note as ‘little consolation’. The trouble with integration is that it creates a dichotomy, like BD was pointing out before, and I’ve already commented on earlier on this thread.

I know about Sartor. Anyone I know in the area hate the bloke. He is a typical mis-representing politician. Nuff said.

I’m not sure if you’re right about Bre, since I haven’t been there for around 5 years, since my uncle passed (he used to run the servo – ‘Simmo’ his name was, your father in law may know him). All I can remember of it was how it illustrated the dichotomy I have talked about. Cultures of violence and dependence prevailing as Indigenous Australians, shifted into urban and told to integrate, struggle for a sense of identity

jkenno,

It is true I do sometimes stew. Bigotry? How about zealot. I like that one.

FRIEDRICH THE ZEALOT. Nice one.

jkenno you really should consider getting off the indigenous soap box.It is only a suggestion so don't blow a fuse.

I don't have that much time on my hands as you would suggest. I post fast. My knowledge is superior to most people. I am well read. I am a superior champion( I could say white man-but that would be vulgar).

Thanks for the all the praise. I blush.

Hi all

Friedrich (post 8:03:32 AM 6/2/06)

Attention: jkenno & Rainier
As a boxer Cassius CLAY (Muhammad Ali) epidomises the Heavyweight division. I always liked him. BUT, there was callousness below the humour & the self-promotion.

Joe FRAZIER helped Ali financially. Frazier's family embraced him when Ali became an outcaste regards his Vietnam stance. Frazier helped resurrect Ali's career, negotiating his return to the ring. What thanks did he receive? None. Only derision & ridicule until the "rumble in the jungle" fight which nearly killed them both.

Frazier was the primary 'destroyer' of Ali's health. HOLMES & others contributed. None received respect from Ali.

Islamic smugness removed the acolades Ali probably deserved. He was culturally alterred once he renownced other than Islam. Sad! He could have been even greater?!
(6/2/06)

Arnel (post 8:27:55 AM 6/2/06)

The riots in Denmark show the blatant disrespect that Islam has for a "host nation" which embraced some of its practitioners seeking a better lifestyle. I believe that the cartoons were unwise, but they don't equate to the burning of flags & buildings as a retaliation.

Vietnamese escaped attrocity in Vietnam, but it gave them no right to become criminals in Australia. Thank goodness most of them were peaceful & integrated. They have done similarly in other nations - regardless of their religious background.

Whether the Perth attacks are racially motivated or not we may not discover. But Sudan is 'divided' into Muslim north & Christian south & the slaughter there is clearly examinable. Aboriginal youths are a separate 'problem'.

The Auburn investigation results will certainly be interesting.

However, Islam seems destined to repeat its own history. Unfortunately many of those rioting in Australia appear to be Lebanese. But it isn't the same worldwide. The common denominator is one religion - Islam. The culture that it breeds from its religious philosophies is the 'problem'.

I do hope that you learn to (or do) separate the ethnicity (race) from the religion.

Multi-ethnicity certainly. Multiculturalism very questionable. The religion (belief) determines the culture. Skin colour or ethnicity often is only a secondary influence.
(6/2/06)

Cheers all

“Vietnamese escaped attrocity in Vietnam, but it gave them no right to become criminals in Australia. Thank goodness most of them were peaceful & integrated. They have done similarly in other nations - regardless of their religious background.”

Upon generations unemployed Vietnamese seek solution on means possible – and Bali demonstrates a very common approach between different “communities” in similar circumstances.

”Whether the Perth attacks are racially motivated or not we may not discover. But Sudan is 'divided' into Muslim north & Christian south & the slaughter there is clearly examinable. Aboriginal youths are a separate 'problem'.
…
However, Islam seems destined to repeat its own history. Unfortunately many of those rioting in Australia appear to be Lebanese. But it isn't the same worldwide. The common denominator is one religion - Islam. The culture that it breeds from its religious philosophies is the 'problem'.”

So-called “Lebanese” are predominantly from Christian backgound.

<“I do hope that you learn to (or do) separate the ethnicity (race) from the religion.

Multi-ethnicity certainly. Multiculturalism very questionable. The religion (belief) determines the culture. Skin colour or ethnicity often is only a secondary influence.
(6/2/06)

Cheers all

Posted by LittleAgreeableBuddy, Friday, 10 February 2006 11:18:19 AM >>

Sometimes it is simply unworkable. Too often, I would say.

TODAY we heard that it is 'prejudice' to speak of a 'Muslim' Australia in 50 yrs by 'demographic' invasion.

Below is an excerpt from a research paper based on information gathered about this matter.
http://elecpress.monash.edu.au/pnp/free/pnpv6n3/Jalal.html

[Lebanese Muslim women who were married early were much more likely than native women and other birthplace groups to have a child under three, net of other influences. A similar age pattern of fertility was found for Muslims and Christians,

although Muslims had higher fertility in all age groups. <-- (NOTE)

The most important finding of this
analysis was that variations in fertility among the selected birthplaces were not significant, when controlled for other socio-demographic characteristics, the exception being the Lebanese.

What are the factors behind the high fertility levels of Lebanese-origin women in Australia? <-(NOTE THIS AGAIN)

Islamic beliefs about family formation and the value of children may be the important factors. High in-marriage, the universality of marriage, and low levels of education and low labour-force participation could be the other main reasons for this pattern.

Fertility Rate for Lebanese between 1977 and 1991 was an average of 3.76

while that for existing Australians of traditional UK background
1.8 approx

Over 3 generations this translates into the following:

Lebanese extended family 28 persons
Australian extended family 8 persons

Lebanese population will be 3.5 what it is now in 3 generations.
(without extra immigration) Anglo population will be 90% of what it is NOW, with no growth whatsoever !

I repeat my call to Anglo Aussies.... HAVE MORE CHILDREN... enjoy family life... build this country and your own future. (I've had 3 and can only have 3 unless I take another wife :) (any volunteers Scout ? :)

Come on BD. You are scaring me (unless you are having a tongue in check slap at the ridiculous comments of liberal backbencher Danna Vaile yesterday) . You being openly racist and you should be ashamed. I almost didn't post seeing I can see the replies already but your openess leave me little recourse. Such posts would not look out of place in the journals of white australia supporters back in the 60's.

Demographics of populations change. Austrlia over-all has a poor population growth rate. The statistics simply say that we must increase immigration to fill the jobs and consequently fuel the economy. Either learn to contemplate difference, or move to Hutt River and build a big fence. You seem to mix sprinklings of rationality and reason with bigotry fairly well mate!

Hi all

jkenno (post 11:11:17 AM 7/2/06)

I clearly hear what you're saying. Like myself you abhore racial bigotry. But take the hypothetical scenario that there are 5 individuals in a room all called "Bill". If I need to identify a particular individual within that room I am going to have to isolate the peculiarities of that person. The peculiarity might be height, hair-colour, weight-proportions, ethnicity or additions to the individuals name, viz Bill SMITH versus Bill AZIMOFF.

Why are we so frightened to identify differences & make everyone the same? Only because of past/present bigotry. The solution to make everyone ignores the reality that we are different. That will have within its own confines socialogical & psychological disadvantages as people try to find their own identity.

I am not offended if someone calls me "a whitey", "a red-head", "shorty" or "an Irishman". I am offended if someone calls me "a c**t".

Isn't it interesting that Muhammad called all women that when he said: "Women have 10 'awrat (external genitals). When she gets married her husband covers one. When she dies the grave covers the ten." ... according to Ali (Muhammad's cousin & father-in-law) Vol 22 Hadith # 858 & Vol 11, Kitab Abad al-Nikah, p.65.

Great respect for women! I don't hear many people objecting to this utterence, which disrespects all women, including your wife, girlfriend, mother, aunt etc.

The subjugation of indigenous people is a blight on all nations throughout history. That can occur through the attrocities of colonisation, the acts of war seen throughout Europe & Asia, or equally through inappropriate immigration policies & a lack of understanding of the implications of multiculturalism where all cultures are deemed to be equal. Some are; some aren't.
(10/2/06)

Friedrich (post 6:51:33 PM 7/2/06)

A German with red-skin pigmentation? Now there's an interesting concept. Better not go back to Nazi Germany!
(10/2/06)

MichaelK (post 3:54:35 PM 12/2/06)

I agree!
(26/2/06)

Cheers all

Hi all

David_BOAZ (post 10:09:17 AM 14/2/06)

Many of your figures agree with Government statistics. In most areas of Australia, European or Asian families rarely exceed 3-children. Amongst many Muslim families it is uncommon for the family to ne limited to just 4-children.

Keysar TRAD himself has 9.
(26/2/06)

jkenno (post 10:51:51 AM 14/2/06)

Hey, if you're going to have a go at Danna VALE, then at least spell her name correctly. She is in no-way related to Mark VAILLE - the Deputy PM.

As to her comments: they are laced with some elements of truth. Danna is not racially prejudiced. She's culturally sensitive. I've known Danna much longer than her time in Parliament. She has friends over many nationalities & of different ethnic backgrounds.

Australia has a poor population growth amongst its current generation because we've become materialistic as a society. We greedily got our 'investment portfolio' of domestic housing price-increases - now we battle to afford to survive. Muslims (generally), within Australia, haven't yet reached that way of thinking. Some will - some won't.

Notwithstanding, we (Australia) have a clash of cultures that will likely replicate what has, & will, be a copy of many other nations - here on earth.
(26/2/06)

Cheers all

I am wondering what is more substantial: having a great life in a place where people copulate regardless bio-origins and religious prejudice or keeping a faith while submitting to self-service…?