Scott,

I reject your interpretation of my inquiries. You're suggesting the shouldn't be discussed with immigrants? Is it that you lack the guts to discover immigrants, and particularly immigrant muslims, lack of understanding of these topics?

I don't understand why you think such discussion 'inquisitorial'? I'd have thought immigrants would grasp these basic's of our society and gladly show their knowledge. Yes I was often questioned about my loyality to Australia, up until about the time I lost my accent. I was never offended. I didn't see the questioners as intolerant nor rude. After very open exchanges of views mutual respect was arrived at.

Irfan asked me a similar question. His was define multi-culturalism? I didn't think his question intolerant nor rude, nor were my sensibilities ruffled. Although it's good to have them ruffled at times. Why is it Irfan is entitled to ask such questions...without recrimination yet if I ask the same I'm accused of being rude intolerant and inquisitorial?
Please answer that question...I'd love to see a mocking bird do a double back flip ...with pike.

Your attitude precludes open exchanges and it's positive outcomes. That's narrow minded and leads to displays of arrogrance and bigotry. It is much better to approach such discussions without a 'victim sympathetic' attitude. Many people often reveal an unseen ignorance and acknowledged their position. That leads to a desire for information. That can only be good for the cohesion of our society.

Mate your approach says things should not be discussed because of assumed sensibilities. Our society left such an attitude behind yonks ago. Come on man get with it.

The issue I wrote about in my post was the underlying precepts of our multi culturalism within our liberal democracy. It is not as you have assigned to me... a discussion on Australian values. Your sermon on your view of Australian values has no relevance within that context. Stick to the topic at hand... boyo! Don't think you can label me as judge and jury on Australian values when I am writing on an entirely different matter.

So I can assume you are an Islamic Apostate as you so explain.
I will give you one consideration but argue- that Islam is not responsible for the degradation of society, it is- hand in hand with the Lobotomized cultural war warriors of the drug induced morons some 40 years ago- to which we owe our antipathy of epistemology of today. Yes, Civilizations are living on borrowed time, as the ideals have be trashed and destroyed by such Moronic warriors.
Australia is not alone:
http://majorityrights.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/76/

And the other Pantheistic notion of Orwellian Human understanding and worship of Misery will lead western Societies into a more Middle Eastern and African life style out look.
You need to understand the reality and not the Automaton program you have been brainwashed with by those Cultural warriors:

http://majorityrights.com/index.php/forums/viewthread/22/

It is not a joke, so start waking up. I will leave it at that or Graham might Delete me.

Aziliz,

You state that “Moslems disassociating themselves from any person preaching violence doesn't work”.

I If a sizable chunk (say half the number that protest headscarves or the Iraq war) of the Australian muslim population where prepared to march or sign petitions in favor of Australian law and against terrorism it would make a huge difference. Saying it doesn’t work without it happening is a copout. Non-Muslim Australia has turned out in their droves for anti-war marches (admittedly dominated by the Socialist parties but at least thousands of well meaning non-aligned people were there).

There are probably many Australian muslims who moved here to escape sharia law (I know Persians who have) and who abhor terrorism. Problem is their leadership is religious and has a stake in propagating Islamic systems and in some cases pushes outright terrorism. If most Muslims in Australia are for Australia, Australian law and terrorism, there is something inherently wrong with their leadership structure as this does not in any way get across. The leaders all want to implement Sharia law – look at the statement from Victoria’s Islamic council yesterday – they want sharia law but want it by democratic meansThe sad bit is that they are so out of touch with reality that they feel this statement is going to make people happy.

It is a pretty simple formula – if there is a section of the community that wants to change the system in a way that does not suit the rest of the population – this population must never be allowed to gain a critical mass where it can successfully agitate for these changes.

It seems that Muslims are muslim first and Australians later while the reverse is opposite for most non-muslims. Until I see some evidence to the contrary I will never feel comfortable with Islam in Australia

Keith

In a debate situation such as OLO I completely concur that it is not ‘inquisitorial’ to ask such questions as you and Irfan have put forth. However, I query your approach out in the real world. I do ask my Muslim friends questions about their faith – but not in an adversarial manner, which is how I interpreted your post.

If you approached the subjects of your straw poll with respect and friendship then I do not take issue, but, mate, it still doesn’t prove anything.

I approach people in a very open and honest manner – this way I receive honest and open responses – asking a stranger how they interpret multiculturalism in Australia just doesn’t sound very friendly to me.

I discussed the diversity of beliefs within Australian culture to exemplify the fact that you cannot paint an entire culture with the same brush – it is entirely in context and very revealing about you that you cannot see this.

Therefore, a straw poll such as the one you conducted proves nothing.

I put my faith in human nature. That is the majority of us want to live in peace and get along with each other. It is the aberrant minority who screw it up for the rest of us.

I work with and socialise with Muslims – have done so for well over 15 years now. And guess what I have discovered?

They’re human!
Regards
Dianne

PS Another reason I suspect that you are adversarial in your approach is that you cannot even respond to me using my correct moniker - Scout.

If I could take this opportunity to repeat the main points of the article.

1. The Oz editors have distorted the words of the PM to suit some strange monoculturalist agenda that it seems they are trying to promote. Then again, the Fairfax press do the same to support their view that Mr Howard is a racist.

2. Mr Howard made some mistakes in relation to migrant settlement history. Apart from that, his comments were quite reasonable.

3. My problem is not so much with the Howard's essential message as with the spin that media outlets put on it.

To Keith.

The reason why Scout will not ask any hard questions to her Muslim mates id because she is frightened of what their answers would be.

Scout has probably had sex before marriage,and that makes her an "adulterer" to Muslims who must be stoned to death. If Scout was to admit to her Myuslim friends that she has had a roll in the hay before marriage, and ask them is she shouldbe stoned to death for it, she does not want to her her friends say "yes,"

The image of poor old Scout buried up to her neck in the mud while her lovely Muslim friends chuck rocks at her head is something that makes poor old Scout wince. Better to leave queastions unasked than to be told what you do not want to hear. it is so much easier believing in an "All you need is love" philosophy" if you avert your eyes from that which you prefer not to see.