>Kevin Andrew's misuse of one family's tragedy is ample evidence that the only person who needs to integrate and adopt Australian values is Andrews himself.< You are quite wrong Irfan. It is the current government of Australia who need to integrate and adopt Australian values. This government has demonstrated a disgusting trait of racial prejudice equal to Pauline Hanson's. When I hear of this, and see the way they treat the Aboriginal population, amongst many of their other transgressions I am ashamed to claim Australian heritage. This is NOT what Australia is about. I have not found any evidence at all that any racial group is more or less prone to negative or criminal activity. What are we thinking in allowing such a government to lead us further into this century?

SHAME, SHAME, SHAME Irfan,
You are using one isolated incident to criticise the Governments integration policy. Something,I believe, you have critised others of doing when arguing against multiculturalism. I have disagreed with you on issues but I beleived your standards to be higher than this article. I'll have to reasses.

If I, or anyone, used the killing of the young Asian lad in Telopia street,I think, to call for a ban on all Lebanese or the gang rapes by the Pakistani brothers to call for a ban on all Pakistanis, you would be right to object strongly. Yet you are now doing exactly this to criticise the integration policy, even alluding to the ethnicity of those charged, who have yet to face court.

Integration assesment would have saved most of the girls from gang rapes and the matters surrounding Cronulla simply because the perpetraitors and/or their parents would have been rejected as their culrure determines that girls in western dress are whores and can be treated any which way. Not to mention their lack of respect for our laws and courts.

As for articdog's claim of racism. You wil see that some 4000 African refugees will still be allowed to enter. With the balance made up by Iraqis and Asians, how is that racist?

gee, banjo. you think this is a one-off? you can't think of any other divisive nastiness which has come from andrews and the immigration department?

gee, bushbusher, ever bothered to check the immigration figures? Immigration is running at its highest levels in Australia's history, with most migrants coming from non-Western countries.

Care to explain how these are the actions of a 'racist' government?

Same argument has been used against every wave of migrants for the last two hundred years from, the Chinese to present day Moslems. In my memory are the Yugoslav, Vietanamese and Arab gangs. All have disappeared into the background and are hard to pick from other Australians.

Each wave of refugee's have bought with it large numbers of unattached minors, who are badly traumise. After a period of time these problems disappeared.

Well said Irfan.Banjo you are bonkers. DReseor learn the difference between an Immigrant and a Refugee.Prejudice and ignorance win the day with you two. Have you any idea of the situation from which Sudanese have fled?
The problem for refugees accepted into Australian is the paucity of assistance available to overcome trauma, to learn English, to reskill and to understand the environment into which they have been accepted.
Why further diadvantage and traumatise people already suffering both?
Why not seek to maximise Australian talents and nuture Australians who are not so well off?
Howard and his mob of lemmings are seriously flawed individuals. They have given no mercy,they can't expect to recieve any.
Bruce Haigh

Australian values? Keeping slaves shot up (SHUR-UP!) – but it is being modified in Internet era, as traditional xenophobia, bigotry and racism have been exposed round a globe dramatically.

It's quite clear that there are political motivations behind Andrews's tirade.

The actual reasoning behind the reduction in Sudanese refugees is to make way for refugees from other areas, including Iraq. This isn't racist, and overall, Australia takes a large number of refugees per capita.

So I don't really have any problems with our refugee policy - Australia does itself proud, and there hasn't been actual attempts to scale this back.
Our refugee intake has remained as something to be proud of under Howard, so funnily enough despite his posturing on issues such as Tampa, we do a reasonable job.

What does bother me however, is that despite doing a good job with refugees, our government wishes to capitalise on xenophobic elements within the community. They're actually playing this both ways.

When Kevin Andrews launched his stupid, misinformed attack on the Sudanese, he chose to cite reasons that would encourage xenophobia instead of taking a reasonable line.

This is something Howard has done as well - see the Tampa incident. It's quite bizarre that this government actually is quite reasonable in terms of refugee and migration policy, but persist with dog whistling gutter politics around election time.

I'm just hoping it backfires on them - though there does seem to be a large element of the community which does indeed buy into the migration hysteria, so it's possible it will score them some votes.

On the other hand, it's possible it will cut both ways... if Labor plays their cards right, they may also be able to have a bob each way... see, the xenophobes may become aware of the fact that Howard's policies have actually been quite reasonable in terms of migration and refugee intake, it's just his rhetoric that is warped.

In which case, if Labor keeps pointing out that they agree with Andrews and Howard's generous migration and refugee policies but deplore his racist rhetoric, then perhaps it will cost them...

Banjo

The purpose of OLO is to set people thinking. A submission to OLO has to be under 2000 words. As the submission has to compete for a visitor’s attention, it really has to be about 1000 words. There is only space to make a point. There is no space to pre-empt every likely criticism.

Ifram put forward a valid point. By adding additional perspective not in Ifram’s article, you made a contribution. That is what you should have done. What you should not have done is included the words SHAME. SHAME. SHAME.

So Irfan, what Australian values were you practicing when you ran as a Liberal candidate (in the seat of Reid in 2001) and when you identify yourself as a right-winger?

This was the same year the TAMPA issue exploded and won Howard another term.

How about you write a piece about this episode in your life instead of trying to re-invent yourself as a socialist humanitarian.

The horror that many of the Sudanese refugees in Australia have gone through is beyond belief. They have fled a war that has been going on for more than 40 years – there’s no hope of going home once “normality” is restored, in many cases their homes are gone and there’s no prospect of peace. And the culture, society and economy they come from is radically different from ours. We should offer them compassion and patience as they struggle to adjust.

One of the highest priorities for many Sudanese refugees is to try to reunite their families by bringing them here. Imagine your daughter in a refugee camp in daily peril of rape, or your pre-teen son hiding from militias that would dragoon him as a child soldier, and you’ll get an idea of the anxiety some feel and the priority they give this.

The cruellest thing about this announcement is that it makes reunion – already a complex and arbitrary process taking years – an even remoter possibility.

Drip!drip!drip! That Chinese water torture disguised as BAd Old Racist Enmity v Australia again.{BORE for short}
There is nothing more racist than an antiracist is there?
Why these malcontents don't go back to their perfect homelands and stay there I cannot imagine.
Us dear old armchair nazis would be happy to refund their fare and all will be happy in our house. Best of luck with yours Irfan, looks a bit messy over there.But then that is what you would be accustomed to.

The problem isn't so much with the government's immigration and refugee placement policies. It's the obvious and shameful dog-whistling tactics being deployed just prior to calling a Federal election.

From the yapping and snarling evident in this thread and others on similar topics, I'd say that Kevin Andrews' ploy is working quite well. Expect more in the weeks to come.

This article expresses the situation quite well:

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22547589-952,00.html

Well, I didn't really know anything about this issue until I read this article and the comments. Now I do (maybe).

The upshot seems to be that a politician has lied for political gain, which is lamentable but hardly surprising.

And isn't it funny how people deny there's any racism in Australian society and then go on about how "ethnics" commit so much crime.

My thanks to CJ Morgan for linking to that article explaining "dog whistle politics". Its one of those phrases that have really annoyed me because I could sort of work out what it was supposed to mean, but was never completely sure. It certainly lacks the resonance of some other political insults ("chardonnay socialists", for example).

Cheers!

Rhys.

Mickijo, I don't really see the point you're getting at in that scarcely understandable stream of invective, but a well constructed argument it ain't.
Perhaps you're missing the point that Sudanese people in Australia, per capita, are committing less crimes than the average Australian.

If you don't want to believe me, at least listen to a right winger - this was the comment from Andrew Bolt:

"But if you still feel you need to whack someone in this latest race riot, have a (mild) crack at Kevin Andrews for making the Sudanese seem worse than the crime figures suggest, by saying he cut the proportion of Africans in refugee intake from 70 per cent last year to 30 now because they'd had trouble settling in."

It's all well and good to accuse people of being ignorant luvvies, but you're hardly offering anything by way of informed comment yourself, so to be honest, I find that a bit rich.

Well Irfans article has certainly provoked debate. I am right to be critical of Irfan's standard of writing. He is capable of much better and it is dissappointing to see. He has constantly said to others not to judge all Muslims by the actions of a few. I can only surmise that he may get paid extra if an article attracts more than 100 posts.

bushbasher, Irfan is using one isolated incident to argue against a policy and milking the victimhood (oh the poor mother) for all it is worth. What about the feelings of the mother of the young Asian lad killed in Telopia St?

Bruce Haigh, Whats bonkers? Is it my criticism of Irfans argument? Is it the refugee intake of 30% African and 70% Iraqi and Asian? What ratio of refugees should there be and why? And where from?

healthwatcher, Irfan is quite capable of putting his arguement in less than 2000 words.

For those that say it is racist. There is no credible arguement. Are you saying that some refugees are more deserving because of their situation or skin colour.

I see nothing wrong with integration assesment. If one group of Sudanese,or any other group, are known to integrate well, and another group of differing culture are known not to integrate. It would be stupid to continue to bring in the group that will not integrate.

no, banjo. irfan is using one example to introduce and highlight the history of the howard government's divisiveness and nastiness.

dresdener, i didn't call anyone 'racist'. so knock it off with the meaningless quotes. i suggested that andrews and the department of immigration had a history of being divisive and nasty. i suggested that banjo's one-off claim was ludicrous. you suggest otherwise?

We have to ask ourselves a serious question;Do we want to be the repository of all the world's problems?All cultures evolve at their own pace and to bring cultures here that seriously undermine the values that have provided the prosperity that many other races now enjoy must be challenged regardless of the ideology or feel good intentions of those like Irfan.

Irfan himself,is a very divisive character as born witness by his biased article.Irfan do you still want Sharia Law introduced into Australia?

Well, having just watched Media Watch's take on the "Sudanese gangs" story, my opinion of Kevin Andrews (and commercial TV news) has hit a new low. The irresponsibility of targetting particular ethnic groups using dodgy "evidence" is contemptible.

Rhys.

Banjo your lack of experience with refugees shows. As does your lack of compassion. Make your case.

Poor weak, silly little Andrews has done his masters bidding. He has vilified the Sudanese and played the race card at a time when the war in Sudan is particularly cruel and savage.

Banjo, you say you see nothing wrong with integration assessment.What does that mean,other than a statement of prejudice? Your seeing nothing wrong certainly doesn't make what you advocate right. What about we try integration assistance?

Arjay, what is this wonderful culture to which you refer? Footy players who live outside the law once the game is over? A state that invades aboriginal land as an election ploy?;that has gone to war to butter up Bush? or which keeps women and children in detention? Could your notion of Australian culture be a shade self satisfied and selfish.
Rhys, I agree with you.
Bruce Haigh

Bruce Haigh and Co are a classic example of ethical purists.All reality must fit their ideology and bugger the consequences.We have over a hundred different cultures/races here and if a particular group are a serious threat to the social cohesion then they are not greater than the whole;but according to Bruce and his followers the minority trouble makers have greater rights than those who produce this surplus prosperity.So from Bruce's viewpoint ,we should become like Sudan or Zimbabwe to appease his particular ethical view of the world.

The world does not have a shortage of people,so why saddle ourselves with more problems than we can handle?

Until the original citizens of this island tell us that the subsequent immigrants, all of us, have integrated, then we haven't.

Accordingly for some irrelevant Minister of some irrelevant government to accuse any immigrant of not integrating is pure ignorance.

Andrews himself has not integrated as he wears a suit and cannot throw a boomerang. Nor has he eaten a witchetty grub or suffered glaucoma, been raped by numerous male relatives, missed school, gone hungry for long periods and been drunk more often than not.

He is not an integrated Australian himself. And nor are any of you.

Irfan

The murder of this Sudanese chap is a tragedy, but the rest of your article is all a bit rich coming from someone who follows the rantings of a caravan raiding jew murdering bigot.
"Leaving people to die", "mothers grieving for their children", "men slaughtered in front of their families", "racism", "intolerlance."
Sounds like the history of the man you and your co-religionists elevate to sainthood.

Bassam
Your ad hominem attack on Irfan is irrelevant to the argument and does you no credit.

As I see it, the facts are

1) The Sudanese refugees who come here are mostly coming from desperate circumstances and have no hope of any decent life unless another country such as Australia is willing to accept them permanently. If some find it hard to integrate, I believe our response should be compassionate understanding and offers of help, not demonisation. And not all do find it hard to integrate - most of the Sudanese families I know are productive and valuable contributors to our community and economy.

2) Generalising about the criminal tendencies of an ethnic group is racist. Furthermore, Andrews’ attack has been shows shown to be without foundation. I believe this is despicable politics, “dog whistling” the racist and fearful in advance of the election.

What make me really laughing are deliberations by English daddies of "integration".

What do they intend to explain, while reading/writing/embracing English/way-of-a-local-sex-on-spot/entertainment WHITE skilled non-Anglos of non-Christians especially, are anyway ostracised/thought/intentionally not employed?

Regarding Sudanese/Africans, it is hard to comprehend a reason of taking in the indigenous South Africans if they could improve themselves in their native free at last from white superiority land –and help Sudanese and other ethnically-linked folks to enjoy their cultures in more familiar environment?

I am surely not racist because enjoyed (and enjoy) free consensual interracial sex with ethnically-various partners round a globe of which recent Australia all-peoples-in-one-place is, no point going somewhere for exotic impressions.

Maybe, one's personal scarcity of a sexual expertise is a good ground for introducing the potential migration sources by itself.

Bruce Haigh,
You read it wrong. It is not a lack of appreciation of refugees circumstances or a lack of compassion. It is applying the compassion to gain the best outcome for all concerned. A bit like not overloading a rescue boat to the point of sinking.

Firstly one realises that we cannot accomodate all the worlds refugees. Secondly is the realisation that, by bringing them here, the ones we can help best are those that will likely integrate into our society. Other refugees may well be better suited and happier in a different society.

You speak of integration assistance. Yes that should be given but only works up to a point. For example, Serbs and Croats, Sunni and Shia Iraqis have deep cultural hatreds for each other. Lebanese Muslims have little or no respect for us, our laws or anyone else. Some of these have been here for 2 or 3 generations and their attitudes show no sign of changing, so no ammount of integration assistance will alter them. Some cultures are completly uncompromising. For at least 14 years we have conducted "education" of those groups that carry out FGM on their daughters, yet Aussie born girls are still being subject to the torture of FGM. Even from these limited examples one can see that there are some cultures that cannot fit in to some other societies.

With integration assessment, not only will those we bring be happier but our society will have far less conflict. As stated before, I think the current 30% African and 70% Asian and Iraqi refugees is a pretty fair mix, given we cannot help them all.

Arjay,

As usual, your response is loaded with the ideological paranoia that you are famous for here on OLO.

You cite ethical purity but do not outline your own ethical stance.

And no,bigotry is not ethical stance.

In hundreds of other posts your point out the virtues of white Australian history and economic productivity but in this post you conveniently cite multiculturalism as the creator of ‘surplus prosperity’.

And can you point out where Bruce Haigh (and others) have called upon to become Sudan or Zimbabwe?

No where – that’s where.

As with other discussions on OLO - you deliberately attempt to increase the hysteria and tempo of the debate so that you can justify and give oxygen to your own paranoid, xenophobic, and fundamentally racist perspectives.

Your reds under the bed, blacks in bush, yellow peril on the boats. Lebo's at the beach discourse is both boring and embarrassing.

Do you do this deliberately? I don’t think you do or know that you do it. Indeed it seems you are completely unaware of it because it’s what you grew up believing to be patriotic and right.

I truly feel sorry for you, you live in such an insular little world of fear.

A “ABC, “Media watch” pointed out none of those on the video involved in the violence were Sudanese, yet all the reports claimed them to be so.

The Commonwealth of Australia is in principle racist, and so the states, as it is approved for this in Subsection 51(xxvi) of the Constitution. Personally I oppose racism but have to concede that constitutionally it is permissible. Getting rid of Subsection 51(xxvi) might then be the better way to go!

While Kevin Andrews introduced the “Australian citizenship test” it is a sheer and utter nonsense, as learning who was a cricketer has got nothing to do with current cultural conduct of Australians.

While the test seems to make out that Edmund Barton was the first Prime Minister, the truth is that Lyne was the first one commissioned on 18 December 1900 and when he handed his commission back then Edmund Barton was given the commission on 24 December 1900, as the second (not first) person to be Prime Minister!

The “citizenship test” neither does expose constitutional reality that “citizenship” is constitutionally a State legislative power dealing with political status (including franchise) and nothing to do with nationality, as we are and remain (subjects of the British Crown”.

If we expect others to learn about Australians and heritage would it then not better that we teach our politicians some constitutional facts?

My book, published in July 2006” about “INSPECTOR-RIKATI® & What is -Australian way of life- really” makes it very clear that it means that every person of whatever religion, colour of skin, nationality, etc, can live his/her life in whatever way he/she desires, including customs and traditions provided it is within the provisions Australian laws!

See people as equal and we all are better off!

"Kevin Andrew's misuse of one family's tragedy is ample evidence that the only person who needs to integrate and adopt Australian values is Andrews himself."

But Irfan, we don't have any values - we're multicultural!

As Canadian polemicist Mark Steyn so eloquently put it:

"In the multicultural West, our values are that we have no values: we accord all values equal value—the wittering English feminist concerned that her tolerance is implicitly intolerant or the Sudanese wife-beater and compulsory clitorectomy scheduler."

http://newcriterion.com:81/archive/20/feb02/msteyn.htm

Gotta love cultural relativism.

Dresdener,

Ah the old "we have no values" line. What a load of bollocks. We as a nation have a base set of values, its called the Law and we expect everyone to follow it. If you don't follow the law then you suffer the consequences.

If you don't like the way the law is run, then do something about it beyond complaining on web forums. Petition your representatives to push your line of thinking, if they won't then run for office yourself. Get involved.

As for Kevin Andrews, he screwed up. He turned a routine decision which had attracted very little criticism from the "usual suspects" (Refugee Reps and so on), into a blatant and badly handled case of Dog Whistling.

http://jamespurser.com.au/blog/How_To_Turn_A_Routine_Immigration_Decision_Into_Political_Dog_Whistling

Rhian

You say:
"Bassam
Your ad hominem attack on Irfan is irrelevant to the argument and does you no credit. "

Anybody suggesting that Muhammed's insane doctrines have nothing to do with this argument is either lying or ignorant. The history of Islam is one of violence and intolerance. Violence and intolerance are the subjects in this article. Maybe you meant I was irreverent.

You say:
"As I see it, the facts are
1) The Sudanese refugees who come here are mostly coming from desperate circumstances and have no hope of any decent life unless another country such as Australia is willing to accept them permanently. If some find it hard to integrate, I believe our response should be compassionate understanding and offers of help, not demonisation. And not all do find it hard to integrate - most of the Sudanese families I know are productive and valuable contributors to our community and economy."

I agree with what you say here, but you overlook the fact that these refugees come from countries who adopt Muhammed's rantings. The very thing contributing to their woeful state in the first place. That is why, when I say it is a bit rich coming from somebody who elevates Muhammed to sainthood whilst pointing the finger at others. Why people would continue to give more energy to Muhammed's insane message is beyond me.

You say:
"2) Generalising about the criminal tendencies of an ethnic group is racist. Furthermore, Andrews’ attack has been shows shown to be without foundation. I believe this is despicable politics, “dog whistling” the racist and fearful in advance of the election. "

Sure, but as more and more people come to know Islam and it's mentally insane prophet, there will be less and less trust of those who follow his rantings.
It is despicable politics, but it is only worse elsewhere. Take Saudi Arabia for example, The Holy Land muslims bow down to each day. There is not one synagogue, temple or church left standing. I can't believe people keep feeding this insanity.

Bassam: "There is not one synagogue, temple or church left standing."

Now that's what I call a good start! Maybe we could adopt that policy in Australia, and extend it to include mosques :)

Basaam
The majority of Sudanese refugees coming to Australia are of Christian and/or traditional animist religions, not Muslims (though some are).

In fact, the Sudanese civil war is often characterised as a conflict between the ethnic Arab/ religiously Muslim North and government, and the ethnic African/religiously Christian South. Most of our refugees are from the South.

This is a great oversimplification of a messy and complex conflict, but holds elements of truth. As a result, some Sudanese refugees have even lower opinions of Islam than you do, though most I have spoken to recognise that you can’t blame the religion for the actions of its adherents.

Our refugee intakes from some other African countries are largely Muslim – Somalia, for example – but Andrews specifically mentioned Sudanese.

Around the time of the civil war in Lebanon, we allowed many thousands of Lebanese Muslims to come here. I think it is fair to say that has not been a great success as,in general, they have not integrated well. Perhaps the multicultural policy had a lot to do with this as people were encouraged to retain their original culture and no effort was made by us to encourage integration. I wonder how many of these went back to live in Lebanon and/or their offspring went to live in Lebanon.

During the most recent conflict in Lebanon we had to evacuate a large number of "Aussies" from Lebanon and they all were not tourists. Given that seminars were organised to inform many of the ways Centrelink could help them once they arrived here, one has to conclude that they had little ties here and had been permanant residents in Lebanon. It is their right to live there if they wish and the reason they lived there is that they preferred Lebanese society.

It may come as a shock to some that there are many people that, after living here, they still prefer a different society.

If this is correct, then we should consider the prospects of likely integration when arranging refugee and immigration intakes. It should not be simply taken for granted that all immigrants or refugees will integrate or be happy here.

Obviously there are differing cultures among African refugees and also among other refugees. Would we not be doing both them and us a favour by bringing those most likely to integrate.

One of the things that is a must to ask of anyone coming to Australia (as refugee or immigrant) is to leave behind your old racial/cultural hatreds. Would go a long way towards eliminating the Serb vs Croat, Sunni vs Shia issues in this country (leave the rest of the world to sort itself out). Now, there is no doubt that we still have deep reservations about accepting people from other cultures, and this should be addressed to. But even that issue would sort itself out over time with the requirements of immigrants to drop their race wars.

Its interesting to see the old Lebanese Muslims dragged up again. Did anyone watch the Australian Story on Hassam Al-masri a couple of weeks ago? It was very interesting to see just how well behaved a Lebanese muslim in with a bunch of ocker Aussies can really be. The rest of the bulldogs club should be ashamed of themselves and their actions. If that's what an immigrant Lebanese muslim is like, then we need more of them not less.

Well said, CG. Poor old Banjo has a real and demonstrated prejudice against Lebanese Muslim Australians, so he appears quite blind to the fact that the vast majority have integrated well into Australian multicultural society.

But I suppose at least he's stopped referring to them as "Lebs" - in this forum at least.

Here we go again mixing race with religion.

Islam has no race. Only 15% come from the Arabic Speaking middle East. Islam as a political religious group - not a particular race - remains the worse non-integratable group of all intakes.

I agree with Bassam that the main reason we have Sudaneese (and other African) refugees in the first place is because of the systematic Islamic religious cleansing taking place in all parts of the world.

It is no different in rural India or in war-torn Iraq. Islam does not discriminate between Jews, Christians, Hindus, or athiest humanists. Anyting non-Muslim qualifies for murder.

All the Howard government - not just Andrews - was united in mentioning the Sudaneese race as a desperate last minute attempt to re-create another Tampa episode to win the remaining red-neck Pauline Hanson votes. Everything else seems to have back-fired on them so far.

Country Gal,
You must be joking,right. You are going to ASK the Croats and Serbs and the Shia and Sunni Iraqis to leave behind their old racial/cultural hatreds and have a REQUIREMENT for immigrants to drop their race wars?

These hatreds are not kindy stuff. They involve bashings, shootings, cars burnt and damaged, guns fired randomly at buildings and intimidation of voters going to and from polls. The hatreds are centuries old and are taught to the kids from the cradle onwards. The only way to stop it here is to stop importing the perpetraitors.

The reason I keep bringing the above up and the Lebanese Muslims is because they are classic examples of migrants not integrating. Yes I saw the story on Hassam El Masri and he is a real exception. Would be good if all Lebanese Muslims were like him, we would not have a problem. But we simply cannot ignore the thousands of complaints from females about rudeness, harrassment, arrogance and dictatorial attitude of Lebanese muslim males. Or the bashings of anglo males by gangs and the lack of respect for our society, laws and standards.
I have not even mentioned the racist gang rapes or the contemptable conduct of the accused, their family and friends in court. These Lebanes Muslims simply will not integrate and, in general, have no respect for anyone else. I have no hatred toward them, it is simply the way it is and no more should be imported.

I usually do not bother with the ravings of morgan, but the reaso i have stopped using the common term of Lebs and use the correct term of Lebanese Muslims is because there are other non-muslim Lebanese the integrate well and I don't want them tainted the same. As well there are other Muslims that have integrated and are no problem.

Obviously there are different cultures of Sudanese and some integrate well and others not. We should bring in those refugees and immigrants that are likely to integrate.

The governments first responsibility is for our citizens and to act to promote a cohesive society

CG, I watched the Hassem story too, what a nice fella and family. He and his family would be welcome in my home anytime.
I wish I could say the same for other (so called real Australians) here on OLO.

Dresdener, so how long have you been a member of Stormfront? its so darned easy to spot.

Banjo: "...the reaso i have stopped using the common term of Lebs and use the correct term of Lebanese Muslims is because there are other non-muslim Lebanese the integrate well and I don't want them tainted the same. As well there are other Muslims that have integrated and are no problem"

It's nice to know that I've been able to assist at least one of our resident xenophobes just a little way along the rosd to good citizenship and community tolerance :)

C J Morgan,
Come back to earth and stop deluding yourself. The reason I stopped using the 'Leb' term was not influnced by anything you had to say.

The comment in my last post should hav read. "I usually do not bother responding to the ravings, etc. etc."

Country Gal,
For many, many years I have seen the problems of multiculturalism, with its emphasis on foreign cultures and the divisivness this has caused. I have argued strongly against it and now it has been replaced by integration which has a far stronger Aussie emphasis and will bring people closer together. However i think integration policy is also doomed to fail if we continue to allow in immigrants, that we know from experience will not integrate and have respect for others and our laws/standards. I do not give a damn about their religion, skin colour or any other physical attribute, but I do care about their ability to be part of our community. All immigrants and refugees must be subject to integration assessment.

so, today we have the report on the deportation of a man to new zealand, despite his having lodged an appeal. the federal judge hearing the appeal refers to the immigration department's actions as "utterly disgraceful".

of course, andrews is an ethical person. i'm sure we'll hear him acknowledging that his department has behaved disgracefully, and promising to make amends.

This topic is a perfect place for improving English only.

Surely, spells of “integration” are a poor self-excuse of own xenophobia and racism:
integration starts on a commonly performed job of which non-Anglos are intentionally, demonstratively, institutionally rejected in Australia but left for “support own community” practice.

Australian values are defined by Australians. Australians are people from anywhere on Earth who live in Australia and follow Australian culture/values.

So many of you guys who have only been in Australia for a few years are so off the mark that it just is not funny. Australian values are defined by those who grew up in the community here and were taught their values by people who were born and bred here. Due to Australia's cutural history it shares a common set of Western values with England, USA and European democracies. If your from overseas and don't like our values then why are you so silly as to be here? Why don't you stop being rude by complaining about what Australian/Western values are and shove off to some other country? If you hold duel citizenship with a second country you can do so quite easily.

To those of you born and/or raised here like myself I say why do you listen to people from overseas when they try to complain about Australian values? People who were born and raised overseas who did not love their own country enough to stay in it and who winge and complain because they do not want to get along here either are just sad and should be ignored.

To them I ask if it is so bad here why not go back to where you came from. But that's just it isn't it? You don't want to leave because where you came from is so bad and you don't want to make the effort to fit in here because you are racist and culturally insensitive to anything execept your own narrow view.

The Australian Treasurer has said "I'm saying if you are thinking of coming to Australia, you ought to know what Australian values are." (Source Interview with Tony Jones, Lateline, Tuesday, 23 August 2005 10.40 pm). He said that over 2 years ago. Why is DIMEA still letting into Australia anti Western people who don't like our values.

I am not “anti-Western” person, but I hardly share appreciation of biologically motivated segregation grounding everything locally.

As understood, asking never before seen stranger in the street “What is your origin?”/”What is your religion?”/”What is a native language you speak?” constitutes a very expression of Australian-style freedom.

Oz_values_for_Australia, when you are referring to dual citizenship as to dual nationality you let the cat out of the bag that you haven’t got a clue what really is applicable.
Not only did I publish on 20 September 2003 a book titled “INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on CITIZENSHIP, but I used also the material subsequently in the 5-year litigation in Court and on 19 July 2006 and succeeded on this unchallenged by the Attorney Generals, etc.
.
Constitutionally “citizenship” is a political position and has got nothing to do with “nationality”, regardless that the Commonwealth purport otherwise.
If you really try to tell people what Australian values are about then I recommend you attend to it appropriately and not give your garbage.
"Australian values", as I published on 6-7-2006 in my book INSPECTOR-RIKATI® on “What is Australian way of life really?” simply is that constitutionally we accept any person from anywhere to be part of the Australian community where they can follow and practice their own religious and other cultural traditions provided it is within the confines of relevant Australian laws.
Meaning, if you desire to hold a BBQ you are permitted to do so provided it is not in breach of local fire authorities decision, such as a fire ban.

"Australian values" is not that because some people in the street are drug addict then others have to follow suit, or because some people in the street are getting always intoxicated then others has to follow suit.
Don't cherry pick "Australian values" as to what you deem acceptable and ignore rapes, robberies, murder, assault Australians also are guilty off.
"Australian values" is you respect your fellow-man’s right to life his/her life as they desire as long as it is within the confines of law.
Therefore, it does not come into play what the culture, religion or other background issues are of any person as the only issue that ought to be relevant is that they are acting within the confines of relevant laws.
We cannot judge others about "Australian values" other then, as expressed, to promote observing Australian law!