yeah, I'm not really catching the comparison between National Socialist ideology and Islam either. Boazy has apparently studied it at length though, so we'll have to go along with it.

I havn't seen anything so far in the 11 or so pages in this thread to convince me that the council decision was anything other than small town syndrome (Small Town Syndrome: common to many small Australian towns).

I was born and raised in a small town. Seen it first hand.

CJ,

<< Multiculturalism has discouraged any kind of sound investigation of other cultures and instead fosters a sense of understanding without actually knowing anything. >>"

Mostly we don’t understand the difference between a deobandi and a whahabi. You'd think that in a multicultural society we'd know about the different communities we live beside. However, due to political correctness, the discussion of other cultures is considered an inflammatory topic best avoided. We instead replace understanding with blanket acceptance, but when the average person finds out this benign picture we have been spoon-fed is not entirely accurate, people react badly.

I have said a number of times I don’t seek to limit migration to this country by race, creed or religion. For me the deciding factor on whether to take someone should be whether they want to be Aussies, to join the pluralistic, liberal democratic tradition we have established in the west. Surely there are places for those who don’t want this. I don’t see what is so wrong with asking people who come here voluntarily to attempt to integrate with our society. Again I am not suggesting that any one group don’t. But we should fine tune our migration process so that we prioritise those who want to come here because they like our way of life, over those who intend to suffer under it until they can change things in their favour.

Multiculturalism doesn’t leave room for the primacy of our culture, which is the result of thousands of years of western liberal thought.

I agree that society should evolve and there is no usefulness in stagnation. But multiculturalism has led to our underselling of our greatest asset and as a consequence a whole host of groups attempting to pare it back or change it for their benefit. With multiculturalism has come political correctness. Our lack of understanding of others has led to ridiculous outcomes in our attempts to avoid appearing rude or insulting.

We are culturally insecure in a time when we need to be confident, and we have every reason for being so. Yet still we struggle.

Paul L. said,

"Our lack of understanding of others has led to ridiculous outcomes in our attempts to avoid appearing rude or insulting.

We are culturally insecure in a time when we need to be confident, and we have every reason for being so. Yet still we struggle."

Yes, well said. Our lack of understanding of others though has also led to some ridiculous outcomes by those who have no problem with being rude and showing their ignorance.

As for you analogy Boaz........your reasoning is absurd and irrelevant. You strive too hard to mock and achieve nothing but show your lack of appreciation of the issue

Paul.L: << Mostly we don’t understand the difference between a deobandi and a whahabi. You'd think that in a multicultural society we'd know about the different communities we live beside. However, due to political correctness, the discussion of other cultures is considered an inflammatory topic best avoided. >>

I wouldn't know the difference between a Methodist and an Anglican, even though I was christened in an Anglican church and grew up in 1960s and 70s Australian middle class society. While most non-Muslim Australians may not know the fine distinctions in Muslim fundamentalist theology, they've probably heard about Sunni and Sh'ia.

With respect, Paul, you've got the cart before the horse. At least under multiculturalism we start from the assumption that all cultures are rich and valuable and therefore worth knowing about, while under assimilationist ideologies any cultural value that is not 'Australian' is devalued - and therefore essentially uninteresting.

<< I have said a number of times I don’t seek to limit migration to this country by race, creed or religion. For me the deciding factor on whether to take someone should be whether they want to be Aussies, to join the pluralistic, liberal democratic tradition we have established in the west. >>

I disagree almost completely. In my opinion, Australia is already overpopulated and immigration should be limited to bona fide refugees, which should be the only criterion for acceptance. They should, of course, be provided with far better language and other educational resources than they currently get, in order to facilitate their ultimate integration into Australian society.

CJMorgan,
I share your view that bonafide refugees should get priority but not only here, anywhere !
What I would like to see is less refugees in the first place. Just imagine if the media jumped onto those who cause people to become refugees as much as they jump onto utterly frivolous starlets & sport stars then I'm sure leaders like Mugabe & other fanaticists would only enjoy very short careers & as a consequence we'd have far less refugees. Why is it that in 2008 we still have people incapable of being considerate & compassionate. Some high rollers start up some gimmick about helping the poor without actually thinking of what those poor need. The same goes for the law. Huge money & resources is spent in proving some idiotic technicality when a few Dollars would have gotten some people in difficulty out of trouble. Yes, here in 2008 we still have such indifferent people in authority.

Research towards my dissertation for a doctorate in “Post modernism and it's negative impact on rational thinking” :)

John D said:

<<I'm not really catching the comparison between National Socialist ideology and Islam either.>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fS81ot0UXN4

I'd be interested in your assessment/comment on this vid?

No John, you don't have to just 'go along' with it mate... rather, be informed.

Perhaps you might like to compare Surah 9:30 with what Sydney's Sheikh Feiz is babbling about

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/police-probe-firebrand-cleric/2007/01/18/1168709876464.html

Remember..its from the 'SMH' not the Daily Terrorgraph.

John, you said you don't see the comparison... yes, I've studied it, (and lived under it) and can help bring anyone up to speed on this. The 'ideology' contained in Mein Kampf about Jews did not spell out “and we must kill many millions of them” but for the perceptive mind..it was there.

You might like to explore this Islamic link.
http://www.pakistanlink.com/religion/2002/0104.html

If you compare the ideas about Jews (and Christians) in this, and how they are assessed in terms of Islamic theology.. and then read the relevant section of MeinKampf, (about race) you will see the 'tone' is very similar. One is about 'racial' inferiority (Mein Kampf) and the other is about 'Theological' inferiority. Both 'documents' were produced by a 'State'.. so you may draw your own conclusions about relevance.

'Thought for today'....

<<anyone who has access to the big historic picture, but assesses today in terms of only 'today' and sentimental wishful thinking, might not live for 'tomorrow'>>