Some interesting material, Boaz. But somewhat confusing, all the same.

I'm particularly intrigued by this:

>>If you compare the ideas about Jews (and Christians) in this [link to pakistanlink.com], 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.<<

Is this what you had in mind?

"Anti-Semitism is bigotry and racism. It is wrong and it has no place in Islam or in Islamic scripture. The Qur’an does not allow hate against any race, nationality or color. Throughout the history of Islam, Muslims have never used passages from the Qur’an to justify acts of anti-Semitism. The ill-effects of racism, including ethnic cleaning, genocide and Holocaust, which has been suffered by Jews and non-Jews alike over the past several centuries, has never been done under the banner of any passages from the Qur’an"

I looked in vain in my copy of Mein Kampf (yes, I do have one) for a paragraph similar in "tone", and guess what - I couldn't find one.

As for your excerpt concerning the "firebrand cleric", I have no idea what lessons you draw from it, but what I see is the law of the land being upheld against a religious nutter. Am I missing something?

And thanks for your History Channel extract, it was fascinating. As always, these things need to be put into context, but considering you view the siege of Vienna as a contemporary event, it shouldn't surprise that you draw parallels from events a mere sixty or so years ago.

As OLO's most prolific Islamophobe, Boazy shows absolutely no compunction in allying himself with racists like those filmed at the Camden meeting. He also seems unaware of the Internet forum convention of 'Godwin's Law' (despite being informed of it regularly), that states basically that the first person who introduces Hitler or Nazism into an unrelated debate automatically loses.

[ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law ]

This is, of course, because such a debating tactic is indicative that the user is bereft of any sound argument and must resort to vilification.

Just like Boazy does with monotonous regularity. Fortunately, most forum users are aware of the somewhat unbalanced nature of both his reasoning and his posts.

CJ,

You say >>” While most non-Muslim Australians may not know the fine distinctions in Muslim fundamentalist theology, they've probably heard about Sunni and Sh'ia”

You say fine distinctions. I think that is an interesting thing to say. Is there really only fine distictions between Hiz-Ut-Tahir and the average Sunni? Are the deobandi just normal sunni muslims from the sub continent? Is the Ayatollah Kamanei’s Islam the same Islam that Shia in Australia practice.

That is Boazy and Philip Tangs point and I’m really hoping that it’s not true. If it is then we really are in a lot of trouble.

You say >>” At least under multiculturalism we start from the assumption that all cultures are rich and valuable and therefore worth knowing about”

They may well all be rich and worth knowing about, except we don’t know about them. If we did then we might find out that there are elements of some cultures which are not compatible with our modern liberal democracy. Multiculturalism says all cultures are equally appropriate in this country. They don’t come from an informed position to make that judgment either, it is cultural relativism from a position of ignorance. I accept that in previous incarnations Assimilation led to many other cultural practices being devalued. In that sense I am not arguing for the Assimilation of the fifties. I am merely suggesting that we should recognize the value of our own culture and encourage migrants to take it on board. We shouldn’t be accepting migrants who don’t like our way of life and will actively work to change it.

You say >>” 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.”

I totally agree with this. And we should be rejecting people who don’t want to learn English and there should be inducements and penalties for those who are already here to ensure they learn the language as well. I note also, that you agree that migrants should ultimately integrate into our society.

TBC

cont,

Integration should be the goal of our migration program. But I believe multiculturalism discourages integration by endorsing the recreation of a migrants cultural life in closed communities, like ethnic ghettoes. This insulates a migrant from our way of life and creates barriers to integration.

I don't believe fundamentalists of any stripe, Christian, Muslim, Jewish or Hindu should be accepted as migrants in this country as they will not integrate. Need I note again that I don’t believe that all Christians, Muslims, Jews or Hindus are fundamentalists. I just think we need to know how to spot one and make sure they don’t get a permanent visa. In that sense I think multiculturalism discourages the investigation that is required to determine who is a fundamentalist and who is not.

You say >>” 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.”

I wonder why you think Australia is more overpopulated than say Indonesia, or Japan, or China? Certainly there is a case to be made that our south east corner is overpopulated, but the top end, which is expected to be a big winner from climate change, is hugely under populated.

Also, if we were to open our immigration to all bona-fide refugees then our population could really take off. Given the number of unpleasant places to live that are out there, we could find ourselves taking migrants from ¾ of the planet.

BTW Shouldn’t these refugees be going home when the disaster, natural or man made, is over? Especially since these refugees may not like our way of life at all

Paul.L
"We should be rejecting people who don’t want to learn English and there should be inducements and penalties for those who are already here to ensure they learn the language as well"
What do you write Paul.L, when my 4 brothers came here, 50-60 years before they did not know an English word, now they speak English but they can not write. when my nephew went to primary school he did not understand any word and his teacher thought that he is deaf!, now one is lawyer, the other high school principal etc. First generation migrants do not know enough English but their children learn English very fast.
What kind of penalties do you suggest for migrants who are already here and do not speak good English? What about the Woomera detention center? Is it enough big? How many millions of migrants we can put there?
"We shouldn’t be accepting migrants who don’t like our way of life and will actively work to change it" In any country there are many ways of life and not only one, for rich or poor, for left or right,for Anglicans or catholics, for Muslims or atheists, for educated and not educated, for the people of cities or from county etc. What about the locals who actively work to change the way of life in Australia? Can we put then in detention centers too?
I actively work to change the way of life, I prefer less hate, less hypocrisy, less racists and I PROMOTE THE UNDERSTANDING AND COOPERATION BETWEEN PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT NATIONAL, RELIGIOUS, LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL BACKGROUNDS FOR MUTUAL BENEFITS, FOR THE COMMON FUTURE!
Paul.L You are an educated person who used to control his words, what happened today and you are angry with us? (migrants)
Even Pauline Hanson was not so hard with migrants as you today.
Is not it better if instead to put them in the corner to try to understand and support them? Always bananas and smiles bring better results from the stick and hate.
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Paul.L: << Need I note again that I don’t believe that all Christians, Muslims, Jews or Hindus are fundamentalists. I just think we need to know how to spot one and make sure they don’t get a permanent visa. >>

Nor, indeed, citizenship. When you come up with a reliable test for spotting fundamentalists, let's apply it to the entire population. Deport the bastards to the Middle East, where they can fight it out amongst themselves. I'm sure it's all predicted in some apocalyptic fantasy or other - just read OLO!

<< I wonder why you think Australia is more overpopulated than say Indonesia, or Japan, or China? >>

Australia's population has passed the continent's carrying capacity, as have Indonesia, Japan and China for the populations that inhabit their territories. They're all overpopulated in terms of ecological sustainability.

<< ..if we were to open our immigration to all bona-fide refugees then our population could really take off.. >>

I didn't say "all" bona fide refugees. Indeed, I think that the numbers of refugees that Australia accepts will become increasingly salient in the not-too-distant future.

Paul.L, I think that your concerns about the future are valid, but I also think that you're approaching them in a very unproductive way. If you keep it up, your evident sadness and anger will only increase, to your own detriment.

The world is still beautiful, and most people are still good of heart. Take a drive in the country and go for a walk in the bush. You appear to need it.