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