ASymeonakis,

You say >>” 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.”

You are misunderstanding what I am saying. I am talking about the small minority of migrants who do not want to learn English. I suspect that your brothers were not offered “English as a Second Language” classes 50 or 60 years ago, and if they were they would have taken them. I wasn’t suggesting penalties for people who don’t speak good English, only those who refuse to learn. Also I was not suggesting woomera detention centre as a penalty. I was thinking more along the lines of centelink payments being docked.

You say>> “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”

I accept this; however I am talking about excluding the people who want sharia law, or changes of that magnitude which completely reorders our national life.

CJ,

I am attempting to have a good faith debate about things which I believe should concern us all. There is no need to be saying stuff like this

“If you keep it up, your evident sadness and anger will only increase, to your own detriment.”

I am not particularly angry about anything, although I do get frustrated at the culture warrior attitude I often come across. I certainly am not sad, at all. To suggest otherwise is a very subjective call, and one which I would imagine only people who actually know me might be capable of making.

You say >>”. When you come up with a reliable test for spotting fundamentalists, let's apply it to the entire population”

We won’t get anywhere if we don’t understand the difference between a mystical sufi and a wahabi. Further, I’m not suggesting that we target existing citizens, only that we apply a little prudence when we select migrants.

tbc

cont,

What you seem to be saying is that the greeks, the Italians and the Vietnamese all had trouble initially, but they have all integrated well. My point regarding the fundamental Islamists in the west is that things are getting worse, not better. The second and third generation muslims have far greater representation in fundamentalist groups.

If we look to Europe, particularly Britain (which is more sensitive to multiculturalism, for example, Burger King withdrew ice cream from its menu because the ice cream swirl looked like Arabic script for Allah) we see that real problems are emerging among their large Muslim populations. In Britain for example, nearly 40% of Muslim young people aged between 16 and 24 would rather live under sharia law. Nearly a third believed in decapitation for apostasy. 13 percent said they admired al Qaeda http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2007/jan/29/thinktanks.religion

Worse, in a poll on the first anniversary of the London tube bombings 16%of British Muslims, equivalent to more than 150,000 adults, believe that while the attacks were wrong, the cause was right. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article682599.ece

This is a big problem for our future because if things don’t change Muslims will be a majority in Britain by 2060. To paraphrase Mark Steyn, If 100% of your population believes in liberal pluralist democracy it doesn’t matter if 70% of them are Muslim or only 5% are. But if one part of your population believes in liberal pluralist democracy and the other doesn’t, then it becomes a matter of great importance whether the part that does is 90% or only 60%, or 50% or 45%.

Now I accept that Mark Steyn is a bit of an @rse, and I don’t agree with many of the things he says, but that doesn’t negate the fact that he has some good points.

Norwegian Imam, Mullah Krekar >> Just look at the development in Western Europe, where the number of muslims is expanding like mosquitoes. Every western woman in the EU is producing an average 1.4 children. Every muslim woman in the same countries is averaging 3.5 children. Our way of thinking will prove more powerful than yours.”

PAUL.. r u in Melbourne? Col Rouge and I are getting together next week most likely for a coffee.. wanna join?:)

Regarding good ol CJ.. at least he is consistent.. you being non Christian (but critical of his pet subjects) and me being Christian and similarly critical of same topics.. and.. notice how it goes?

If you disagree with me or..criticize my pet topics.. you are:
-Sad..
-seething with hatred.
-filled with loathing.

etc ad nauseum...

I find it amazing that his irrationality seems to know no bounds.

Let me demonstrate..

SYMPTOMS OF IRRATIONALITY:

1/ Paul quotes a Muslim who points out some demographic realities which will over time result in the Islamification of Europe.
(This is 1+1=2 stuff)

2/ Rather than suggest we alert ourselves to similiar trends here, no..he just 'calls you sad' (and me "filled with loathing" :)

CONCLUSION.. in the face of overwhelming evidence that 'warnings of increased Islamic political power' are well founded, he simply resorts to name calling.

Now..that..is irrationality :)

To use an Islamic text:

Quran says: "finally You may beat her" (ur naughty wife) (4:34)

Aussie Critic says:

"Any faith which supports spousal abuse by specific permission, is a danger socially."

Critic of critic (this is CJ)

says "you are sad, filled with loathing"

again, clear evidence of 'irrationality'.

CJ..don't worry mate..I've booked you in at the ANU centre for mental health research..and Dr Emily Banks will look after you.

Yes..I'm stirring, but there is often a lot of truth spoken in jest.

CJ.. yesssss this is a personal attack :) u may quote it in future.
But it has your healing in mind 0_^.

Can we make this a foursome?

>>PAUL.. r u in Melbourne? Col Rouge and I are getting together next week most likely for a coffee.. wanna join?:)<<

Looks likely I'll be in Melbourne next week too - probably Thursday.

Boaz,

I'm in Townsville at the moment. Would be a rather long drive for lunch. Thanks for the invite though, If I'm down that way I'll let you know.

Hi Pericles.. by all means! if Col's agreeable. We need to sort you out :)

you can email me via Graham if you wish.

In the other thread (Interpretation) I'll be sending a post there soon, looking at 'social context' among other things.. related to 'how adherents interpret' information.

Hope you will look at it. (take a vallium first :)

On Topic... just reiterate that a lot of the 'rejection' IS based on bigotry, mainly because it is knee jerk, and emotional and based on media stereotypes and sensationalization...RATHER than a careful, studied, information based approach.

I hereby offer myself to Katie as 'helper' :)
But.. I don't think we can cram enough into her head in the short time available.

Fred is pretty good, but his image works against him. (Like mine here?)

POLICY is the answer..not civil unrest and wild eyed villagers with torches.

All Politicians reading this are invited to the thread "How to interpret texts, religious and secular" :)

(but you have to ignore some of the more off topic posts from certain enthusiastic folks who seem to have a lot of issues...not many of which relate to intepreting text)