Has multiculturalism become a dirty word? Yes.

In the 70's, 91% of Australians were against the ideals of multiculturalism. And how comical it is to see people entering this country who have nothing to offer multiculturalism.

The Prime Minister has seen that we don't want to become prisoners in our own country as is already the case in some parts of England and France. Even the Police won't go to some areas. I am glad that we have people from many places making up our nation but I am also pleased that we have people smart enough to know that we need to be selective about immigration. Call that dicrimination or whatever but I don't want no paedophiles in my house.

Multicultualism, in an ideal world, is a noble and fantastic concept. Certainly a far better concept than the ‘White Australia’ policies of the past. However, the ‘do gooders’ and ‘cultural elite’ in this country ruined the concept in the late 60’s and early 70’s.

The waves of immigration from Italy and Greece in particular during the 50’s have proved to be wonderful successes. Similarly, while problematic at first, the Vietnamese refuggees who arrived in the late 70’s, have now integrated into society and contribute. While I don’t wish to single out ethnic groups, it has become extremely obvious that certain communties refuse to even broadly subscribe to Australian values and have no intention of accepting general concepts held valuable within the community (ie not meat pies and footy but women’s rights, religious rights, legal principles etc).

Unfortunately, during the early stages of what is now coined multiculturalism, the ‘cultural elite’, a somewhat patronising and stuffy collection of pseudo intellectuals, bludgeoned us all into accepting that ‘assimilation’ was a dirty word. This was probably because this stuffy little group was (and still is) a self loathing collection of individuals confounded by just how great the simple life of most Australians is.

It is wonderful to eat souvlaki cooked by an Athenian Australian, learn Mandarin from a genuine Chinese Australian, and learn from the extended family support systems of confucian and Italian cultures.
BUT it is not wonderful when immigration encourages a lack of meanigfull interaction and respect-thatis exactly what multiculturalism was not meant to achieve, but has

MultiCulturalism as a means to political domination.

Step 1 "TOLERANCE" of diverse views, particularly religious.

Step 2 While the non 'you' are tolerating you, build your networks and strengthen your people, educating them in the ultimate goal of dominion. Distance your self from those who are too 'blatant' in their zeal, but keep close links undercover with them.

Step 3 To become strong, you engage in many social activities, medical, financial, assisting the poor and disadvantaged, who then give you their unswerving loyalty.

Step 4 When the time is ripe, arm your supporters, claiming they have been victimized long enough. Take over the whole system with a militant rampage.

Step 5 DECLARE your original (back burner/silent) goal of an Islamic State.

And there you have HAMAS in GAZA today. Does anyone seriously think, (particularly Pericles and CJ) that HAMAS will now care two hoots about altering their Charter? which includes the non possibility of negotiation with Israel about its existence?

If I have misread this 'multi cultural' step by step account of contemporary Gaza history, I need to be shown so. If I have misread the goals and strategies of HAMAS ..then demonstrate it.

I speak from what happened, that we all know and can see and verify.
Any disputation of my assessment must be subject to this reality.

Now... PREDICTION.

As sure as I am writing this, and you are reading it. HIZB UT TAHRIR is, in my opinion, an organization in the same mould as HAMAS. The idea that they are not following a similar strategy is ludicrous.
Their charter/constitution signals the death of choice, freedom and any hint of secular life.
WAKE UP... Australia.

Australia's first Prime Minister was Edmund Barton - not John Barton.

Regardless of that blooper, I agree with the sentiments of the article. Monoculturalism, as we've seen in places like France, Serbia and Islamic states is either a disaster or a recipe for authoritarianism (or both). Who wants to live in a place like Malaysia where non-Islamic cultures face severe repression? Perhaps some of the critics of multiculturalism may enjoy it but not me. They should move to a monocultural country if they don't like Australia. Maybe North Korea.

Australia has always been multicultural. Prior to occupation in 1788, local nations spoke hundreds of different languages for a start (not counting the dialects). I wonder if Howard and his ignorant followers know about this?

BOAZ's five steps by which he reckons that immigrant groups in Australia are planning to take over, no doubt keeps him amused.
But he forgets basic realities. While life is probably pretty easy for BOAZ, growing up here or in a similar country, knowing the ropes, how to get a job, how to get by etc, immigrants and refugees from Asia or Middle-East though, are preoccupied 24 hours with just trying to survive.
I have worked with migrant support services - while they are good, they still leave the immigrant with a massive task of just getting to know the new terrain, and spending hours, days or weeks on small administrative tasks that take the local Aussie no time at all. They are in a strange environment, dealing the likes of BOAZ constantly - that is people who are uncaring or suspicious - and simply surviving can be a full time job.
I doubt very much whether the vast majority of migrants and refugees have enough time left over after trying to maintain food and shelter, to be bothered with even thinking about implementing BOAZ's five step plan to dominate Australia.