Passsing through Camden many times on the old Hume Highway, it has always seemed a quite nice town, being the last rural town before Sydney, nestled in the Camden valley,just below the famous Razorback mountain. It was built up from the dairy industry and in later years has become a domitary town for people who commute to the Sydney area daily for work.

Now developers have expressed interest in establishing a large school there for Muslim students. Council has rejected the proposal, on the site, citing planning reasons. Whether this will be upheld by the courts or if another site is chosen or the proposal is abandoned has yet to be determined.

Should these developers continue to focus on the Camden area, the impact on the town may be very significant. Firstly the school would require a large staff and they, together with many parents, would look to relocate to Camden, to be near the school. As in other areas this may well result in lowering the real estate values and later adversely effect the social amenity of the area.

My property market contacts already inform me that there has been a significant lowering of purchasser interest at this stage. I have a few investment properties and I would not consider buying property in the Camden area now for the same reasons I would not buy in any area where a proposed development could adversely effect property values.

I feel sorry for the people of Camden as they have worked to have a nice town and now their work and investments are under threat. They have been labled as racist and bigots, and there may be a few, but the vast majority are simply concerned about the future of their town.

The only way they could not lose further is if the developers publicly state they are no longer interested in the area.

Banjo,

Could you elaborate on why putting a new school in Camden would drive property prices down. Surely more people moving there would drive demand, and prices up?

Would you feel differently if this was a Christian School?

cheers,

gw

gw

please look at 'Islamic values' and compare them with 'Christian values' in relation to those outside the faith communities mentioned, and then feel free to ask yourself which type of school you might prefer based on those values alone. (As opposed to errant behavior sensationalized in either history or the media)

A Christian school, does not represent any threat. People can send their children there or not. They might be fed a diet of "Religious instruction" as a pre-condition to admittance, but they knew that b4 hand, and, one should ask 'Where would that instruction take them'?

You can be sure of one thing, it will NOT take them down a path where they read

<<"Fight against those who (1) believe not in Christ Jesus, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by the Lord and his Church (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Christianity) among the people of other Scriptures (Muslims, Hindu's, Buddhists etc), until they pay the 'unbelief tax' with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.">>

Just out of curiosity....IF we did teach that in our Churches, proclaiming it regularly and loudly from our pulpits.. how would you feel about it? Please be honest here.

I find myself repulsed by such an idea. Just imagine if the New Testament DID teach such a thing.. I have a feeling you would be in the large crowd of protesters at St Pauls, waving signs about 'dangerous values' and 'hate speech'..would you not?

gw,
Thanks for your question. Yes in normal circumstances a development of that size and the resulting influx of staff and parents to the town would be seen as a positive thing. That is if the proposal was put forward by the state or any religious group other than Muslims.

Most people could not care less if somebody prays to Allah or a sun god but Muslims have a bad reputation for causing lots of social problems. The result being that most non Muslims do not particularly want to live in the same community where there is a large number of Muslims. The possibility of a large influx of Muslims is the reason the people of Camden voiced their disapproval. They foresee their social amenity and their capital investment highly at risk.

There are plenty of places where the risks are not nearly so great, so property investors and potential non Muslim residents will look elsewhere. This results in a lowering of property values at Camden.

Property values are also subject to the reputation of an area. Camden runs the risk of losing value because people don't want to live somewhere that is seen to be a hive of bigotry and potential lynch mob violence.

Nothing good.

Council knocked backed the proposal on "planning" grounds, NOT "religious" grounds. The development WILL go ahead "if" the developers address those planning issues in the future, or if they issue a successful court challenge, as is their right in a free country.

Many of the public spectators at the now infamous council meeting were NOT THE LEAST BIT INTERESTED in the planning issues........they just hate Muslims and don't want Muslims on "their" turf. It's the old Aussie "fear of other cultures"....we've seen this paranoid, inbred fear before when Italians migrated, when Greeks migrated, when Chinese migrated etc etc. Gee, even the ancestors of "white" Aussies migrated, remember that? Did "our" ancestors ask the inhabitants of this land for their permission? We all know the answer to that. No, they just came here, took what they wanted and inflicted a foreign culture upon this land. The Aussie "blokes and sheilas" of Camden know this and are paranoid with fear that this will happen to them!! They've fallen for all the propaganda, are convinced that all Muslims are terrorists and all Muslims desire to "force" Islam upon them. They know "they" are right, and that anybody who doesn't agree with them just doesn't know the facts. They're the perfect targets for propaganda...... receptive, pliable, suggestible.

Paranoia rules the day among these types. That's life, and it's always been that way. The human race, despite our technology, remains horribly primitive, barbaric and territorial.

Rural folk become bitter, and cling to racism and religion

Dear Phillips.

You said:

<<Did "our" ancestors ask the inhabitants of this land for their permission? We all know the answer to that.">>

COMMENT: We also know what our ancestors DID to them.

<<No, they just came here, took what they wanted and inflicted a foreign culture upon this land.>>

COMMENT: which you admit in the above.

<<The Aussie "blokes and sheilas" of Camden know this and are paranoid with fear that this will happen to them!!>>

COMMENT: Of course.. they have absolutely no historic precedent on which to base this fear?:)

<<They've fallen for all the propaganda">>

Interesting perspective:

Not sure which propoganda u mean. Newscorp? Would you mean the many many acts of terrorism which have been reported? (none of which actually happened of course...right?)

Or..perhaps Tracy Grimshaw on ACA repeatedly trying to get a straight answer from Wassim Dourehi on "Is Australia an enemy of Islam?" 3 times.
Or the 11 men in Sydney and 12 in Melbourne on trial for allegedly plotting horrific acts of terror on our shores including blowing up the MCG on grand final day.

It might even be that some of them have read the Quran, and it's command to make war on non Muslims. Surah 9:29 & 30 (but they just take that out of context...right? and of course they have never met a Muslim, specially the kind one who lives next door to you:)

I hope one of these days, someone will actually take the time to try to refute the present day applicability of such teachings/commands, but alas, they just take the easier and less time consuming path of calling everyone "paranoid" and "Islamophobic":)

PS.. the only reason our ancestors did what they did to Australia was..'numbers'...they had them. Are you suggesting human nature has improved since then? Maybe it's just 'white' people who do such evil things when they have the power...yeah..thats it:)

philips: << Many of the public spectators at the now infamous council meeting were NOT THE LEAST BIT INTERESTED in the planning issues........they just hate Muslims and don't want Muslims on "their" turf. It's the old Aussie "fear of other cultures"....we've seen this paranoid, inbred fear before when Italians migrated, when Greeks migrated, when Chinese migrated etc etc. >>

Quite so - and it's exactly these xenophobes that Islamophobic nutters like Boazy seek to recruit in their odious campaign of hatred and vilification.

steel: << Rural folk become bitter, and cling to racism and religion >>

That may be so in many places, but the residents of Camden could hardly be described as "rural folk" these days. Rather, those who we saw on TV were the kind of bogan battlers who have moved out of their former suburban wastelands into areas that were formerly rural.

Like many who exist literally on the outer fringes of society, they are often hateful towards anybody who is different to them, and tend to project their hate and uncertainty on to those with whom they compete most directly for jobs and housing.

Unfortunately, it is these people who often become willing if ignorant footsoldiers in culture wars conducted by ideologically-driven lunatics who ceaselessly promote fear and loathing. What does the future hold for Camden?

Probably a more modest Muslim school, situated in an outer suburban bogan nightmare.

Dear CJ

<<ignorant footsoldiers in culture wars conducted by ideologically-driven lunatics who ceaselessly promote fear and loathing.>>

Sounds like flaming to me :)

As I've said many times, raising awareness is not ceaselessly promoting fear and loathing. But... I don't mind taking it easy for a while, specially since all that I've been saying was confirmed today by some chaps from Oman, Saudi Arabia and Afganistan, manning a 'Discover Islam' stall at the MindBodySpirit event in Melbournes exhibition buildings.

The 2 verses I usually point to are in Surah 9:29 and 30.

See my last post in the interpreting thread for more info on that.
I asked the bloke from Saudi Arabia to read 9:30 to me and comment on its meaning. He did so, and then, after we cordially discussed it for a bit, along the lines of 'How do you think Christians might feel to read or hear such things'? he said "But these are the words of Allah"

Then, as if to drive the point home (or some might say 'twist the knife') he quoted from another surah which was harsher still on Christians who believe Christ is the Son of God.

He didn't do this to annoy me, but to explain the position unambiguously.

The meaning I've been reporting for 9:29 (fight them) was agreed without the slightest hesitation by them also.

The thing Aussies don't realize is that they are actually 'sincere' in their belief about these things. This is the scary bit.. it's not a reaction to anything outside Islam, but simply the manifestation of the faith in original purity.

We enjoyed some more banter, and friendly digging, and we parted on cordial terms as I returned to our stall.

Later one of them (From OMan) came to our stall and we had a long and deep conversation about the faiths. (more detail in new thread if approved)

In religion we have some people who, even in these modern times, interpret their ancient holy books LITERALLY.....this applies to BOTH Christianity AND ISLAM. It suits the agenda of some fundamentalist Christians in Western society, and other anti Islam people, to emphasise LITERAL interpretations of Islamic violent text, and to point out that some fundamentalists from Islam ALSO interpret LITERALLY.......the Christians' point being that ALL Muslims believe in violence, ALL Muslims believe in forcing their beliefs on others and ALL Muslims believe in LITERAL interpretations of ancient texts.

It's a view based on fear of what they don't understand (but believe they do), and paranoia and defence of their fundamentalist Christian religious turf. They of course, completely ignore the myriad of violent quotes found in ancient biblical texts. Why? Because it doesn't suit their agenda to offer, in public, literal interpretations of violent Christian text But they're happy to do it with "LITERAL" interpretations of violent, Islamic ancient text

But if they can convince anyone that ALL Muslims, worldwide, from ALL cultures, unquestioningly believe in "LITERAL" interpretations of ancient Islamic texts......then they feel they're doing their job in defending Christianity/or Aussie culture: Regardless of the FACT that they are merely telling DISTORTIONS of fact, they KNOW that "some" paranoiac and frightened people will believe every word they say.

Some people love to pretend that violent terrorists, and their sympathisers, are NO DIFFERENT to the ordinary, everyday Muslims who, just like most Christians, live in peace wishing no harm on others. Their ignorant goal is to tar ALL Muslims with the same brush, and because there's so many terrorist, political acts committed by violent people "claiming" to act under the mantle of Islam, their task is pretty easy....... their false analogy being if someone claims to be Muslim and commits violence then "ISLAM AS A WHOLE" is guilty and ALL Muslims are potentially the enemy, evil, wicked and violent. It's simply paranoia gone crazy, but it pleases the fundamentalist Christians and the other bigoted members of the community who HATE and/or FEAR people who are not EXACTLY the same as "them".

OK, to show how silly any ridiculous "LITERAL" interpretation can be, and how misleading it can be if it is falsely applied to ALL modern religious worshipers, here's an example of an extremely violent quote (there's hundreds and hundreds of them) from ancient "Christian" biblical text:

"And the Lord's anger burned against them, because they turned to other gods. The Lord said to Moses, "take all the leaders and kill them in broad daylight before the Lord, so that the Lord's fierce anger may turn away from the people of Israel".

So there ya go folks...... let's interpret this Christian quote "LITERALLY", just like the Christian, and other, bigots like to interpret violent Muslim ancient text "LITERALLY" (while using that "interpretation" as a device against all Muslims): The "Christian" god is angry, he is fierce, he personally ordered Moses to commit violent acts of murder and he wanted those murders to be committed in broad daylight in front of him......that's the literal interpretation. It teaches Christians to follow the Lord's word by becoming violent murderers of people who don't worship the "Christian" god!

Of course, for a modern day, educated person to actually "believe" this rubbish would be ridiculous.....he/she would definitely be a fundamentalist. Now "THIS IS EXACTLY" how "some" bigoted Christians/and others love to represent the violent quotes in ancient Muslim text (while totally ignoring the violent quotes in ancient Christian text). By presenting absolute LITERAL versions of ancient quotes, they are trying to give the "IMPRESSION" that ALL Muslims are violent, murderers, terrorists and need to be FEARED. We "ALL" know that some fundamentalist and political activists claim to act under the mantle of Islam.......this makes it VERY easy for the bigots among us to attack Islam and ALL Muslims, and perpetuate their fear and loathing of ordinary, everyday people who are not just like "them".

philips: << Of course, for a modern day, educated person to actually "believe" this rubbish would be ridiculous.....he/she would definitely be a fundamentalist. Now "THIS IS EXACTLY" how "some" bigoted Christians/and others love to represent the violent quotes in ancient Muslim text (while totally ignoring the violent quotes in ancient Christian text). By presenting absolute LITERAL versions of ancient quotes, they are trying to give the "IMPRESSION" that ALL Muslims are violent, murderers, terrorists and need to be FEARED. We "ALL" know that some fundamentalist and political activists claim to act under the mantle of Islam.......this makes it VERY easy for the bigots among us to attack Islam and ALL Muslims, and perpetuate their fear and loathing of ordinary, everyday people who are not just like "them". >>

Spot on, philips - you've described Boazy and his hypocritical, hate-mongering cohorts to perfection.

Phillips,
The only thing you got right, and relevant to this thread, is that the development will be decided on 'planning matters'. If people think that objecting to a development will prevent it, they are mistaken. Peoples wishes are not a consideration for development approval and the L&E court or the Minister do not consider that.

I am not religious at all, so I don't bother to read the stuff about any religion and in this case the issue is not about religion.

People like yourself, steel and Morgan are manipulated by media propaganda which sensationalizes issues such as this.

The people of Camden are not bigoted or racist. Their first concern is economic as they can foresee their property values falling if Muslims move into the area. History has shown this to be the case in the S/W suburbs of Sydney. An influx of muslims has not been positive for any suburb in relation to property values.

The second concern Camden people hold is if many Muslims move to the area it will mean a loss of social amenity for the existing non muslim residents. History also shows this to be the case in suburbs with high muslim populations. For years, the social problems associated with Muslims have been aired on OLO, so it is not necessary to show them again.

As Kactus said in the other Camden thread, these are legitimate concerns. Dispite all the media hype, the above are the real reasons for concern about the development.

As for the future, well if the developers continue to pursue the matter, it is a safe bet the present residents of Camden will suffer.

Philips - sorry to rain on your parade
and
CJ - you should know better by now

Boaz will wriggle out of Philips' above quote by saying, "that's the Old Testament, I'm a Christian and follow the New Testament." However, JC did admonish his followers to obey the OT:

"5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

And if Boaz claims that this is a wrong "interpretation" try this from the NT, where Jesus warns of the fate awaiting people if they refuse to listen to his disciples, charming:

"10:14 And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

10:15 Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city."

Cheers m'dears

:-D

Fractelle
You are a Cristian theologian!
Do not worry in PARAGUAY? the new left president was, some years before, a catholic bishop.

Banjo
About the question "What does the future hold for Camden"
The Camden is not the first and will not be the last one with this kind of problems.
Read what happened in USA, EUROPE OR UK.
They are full of mosques and of cause from their high minarets every one can listen "the call to prayer".
The freedom for religious is a fundamental human right,and it is protected from the international law, which is stronger from the state or federal law and any try to blog the spread of mosques in Australia will fail. The locals could create temporary some problems to Muslim religious BUT ONLY TEMPORARY.
MUSLIM'S RIGHTS ARE PROTECTED BY LAW AND SOONER OR LATER THEY WILL FIND THEIR RIGHTS IN THE COURTS.
SOONER OR LATER THE CAMDEN WILL BE FULL OF MUSLIM MOSQUES, IF THEY WANT IT!
You know, it is not bad if we use our brain before we open our mouth!

Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Dear Banjo,

Most people fear change to a certain extent. Particularly change that they consider alien to their way of life.

Having a religious school of over 1200 students in a small rural community is bound to have an affect. Especially when the religion is not that shared by the community.

The City Council voted on the issue - but as you pointed out - the decision will ultimately not be theirs in the long run. It will be a
decision made by the State - according to existing legislature.

What I don't understand is - what's the attraction of Camden? Why isn't the school being built in a community that has a larger Muslim population? Why bother going all the way out to a small rural community - like Camden? Is it because the cost of land is so much cheaper at Camden?

I think Antonios is right here - the Camden community will not win this one.

antonias,
You are right in that it is not the first time and will not be the last that peoples lives are altered by a development of one kind or another. But that doesn't stop me from feeling sorry for those adversly effected. In this case, there has been a lot of media hype about racism and bigotry when,in my view, there are other more compelling factors involved in people objecting.

Foxy,
Like you I don't know why Camden was chosen by the developers. If they propose to spend $14million one can only expect that they have done their homework, looked at future needs and came up with Camden as the best site.

Its a good example of how we are vunerable to change. Sailing along, content with where we live, etc. and suddenly a new motorway, airport, incinerator or some such proposal can upset our apple cart and we are down the tube financially as well.

Foxy
welcome!
I did not read any post of you last days and I was worried for you! Are you ok?
thank you!

The proposal was rejected by council for all the "right" reasons.

Many ignorant, redneck protesters wanted it rejected for all the "wrong" reasons. They hate Muslims, they fear Muslims.......they also know very little about Muslims except what they read in the press and hear from their friends.

Australia IS changing.

Australia has ALWAYS been changing......ALWAYS.

Australia has NEVER stayed exactly the same.

Some people will ALWAYS resist change.

Some people will NEVER accept change...initially.

These are simple FACTS OF LIFE and indicative of human nature.

Only 2 things are "certain" in life.......death and CHANGE.

Applying for planning approval is part of our democratic and capitalistic system......as is appealing decisions. Sometimes you get the result you want, sometimes not. This time, the Camden rednecks got the decision they wanted (by "rednecks" I mean the people who objected to the proposal based on anti-Muslim sentiment); next time they may, or may not, get the decision they want. Either way, these decisions are part of the capitalist system we live under........and if the rednecks don't like any eventual final decision, then too bad. It's all a part of "change". If the ignorant rednecks want to live in a "Fortress Australia" then they'll live their sad lives eating other peoples' dust; they'll be left behind; just mere bogans living on the underbelly of a progressive and vibrant Australia.

An example of the Camden rednecks was the incident last November where 2 pigs' heads were pierced with metal stakes, and an Australian flag was draped between them.......this was then placed on the development site.

These morons were not showing Aussie loyalty. They were merely showing the country how inbred and hateful, not to mention plain unintelligent, they were. Absolute morons, not worthy to call themselves "Aussies"! Just petty crim types, trying to pretend they're in control.

Dear Antonios,

Thank you for noticing. I have been away for the past week. But, I'm fine, and I'm now back - and happy to be posting again.

The Camden situation looks like being a test case.

It will be interesting to see what the future holds for this small rural community.

I can't help but wonder why the city council isn't able to restrict the size of the school that is to be built in their community?
1,200 students is a very large school for any area. But, especially unsettling for a small rural community.

Yes, it is a large school, and too large for the area. Maybe they'll need to moderate their ambitions if they wish to develop the site.

Phillips,
"Many ignorant, reneck protestors wanted it rejected for all the wrong reasons. They hate Muslims, they fear muslims....they also know very little about Muslims except what they read in the press and what they hear from their friends."

Talk about basing ones opinions on what one reads in the press. You have swallowed the media hype hook, line and sinker. Your mind is now closed. The Camden people protesting, are 'renecks' pure and simple. They hate and fear Muslims and have no legitimate or reasonable concerns on which to oppose the development.

What makes you believe that the people of Camden are different to any other community, or are all Australians basicly 'renecks'? Funny how we have accepted people from all races and creeds here isn't it? Camden is no different. Sure there was anti-Muslim sentiment and that is because Muslims have a poor reputation. The bad reputation of Muslims should be acknowledged. People do not want to see their homes, etc. devalued because of disreputable moving in or and increase in anti-social behavior. This has happened in other areas and is fact.

As an example of "the Camden renecks" you quote the matter of a display of 2 spiked pigs heads with an Australian flag. What is offensive to muslims about the display and what is the message from the display. Was there a written message as well indicating hate for Muslims? If not what was the message? Why do you quickly come to the conclusion that so called Aussies erected the display.

Could not the display be erected by 'Muslim radicals' with the intended message of "Aussie pigs keep out, opposition will result in decapitation". Afterall Muslims have been known to refer to infidels as pigs and cutting heads off seems a favorite pastime of radical Muslims.

Or maybe the display was erected by some in the media to flame the situation. To my knowledge no one has claimed to erect it so it is entirely spectulative. Agreed that who ever erected the display are brain dead morons.

I was present when the council decision was announced. I spoke to the residents there and was also witness to their private conversations. The "mood" was NOT against a possible unfavourable decision based on planning perspectives.......the general mood was "ANTI-MUSLIM". Only a handful of people mentioned the planning issues, of which there are many, and these planning issues are all relevant.

My posts are based on "WHAT THE CAMDEN PEOPLE AT THE MEETING ACTUALLY SAID". They are concerned that their present lives will be disturbed by "MUSLIMS". They are VERY scared and fearful. They "BELIEVE" every bad thing they read about Muslims, and apply it to ALL Muslims. Some of them mentioned to me that they don't want terrorism to become entrenched in Camden. They are suspicious and paranoid about ordinary, everyday Muslims and think all Muslims journeying to Camden are potential enemies and terrorists.

I spoke to about 15 individuals, several groups and witnessed the conversations of well over a dozen groups. I was there because I didn't want the development to go ahead, because in it's current form, it's unsuitable for the area. I spoke to only 2 members of the public who, like me, objected to the proposal on planning grounds. The council got it right, and for the "RIGHT" reasons.

There's plenty of people in Camden who stayed away from that council meeting. Who in their right mind, would want to mix with uneducated bogans: I forced myself, in order to more fully understand what the people were thinking. Almost the ENTIRE population of Camden was NOT at that meeting. A "minority" was there to cause trouble and to try and inflict redneck influence. Camden is a great place for me to live, and it's NOT dominated by redneck attitudes. There's a "minority" of noisy, forceful rednecks here that give the area a bad reputation: That, more than anything else, affects property values.The "majority" are not like that, and are happy to let planning decisions be made based on "the relevant planning issues".

Common sense has prevailed. I congratulate the council on a good decision.

Banjo: << Talk about basing ones opinions on what one reads in the press. You have swallowed the media hype hook, line and sinker. >>

It transpires that philips was actually at the meeting. Where does Banjo get his information about the Camden community?

<< Could not the display be erected by 'Muslim radicals' with the intended message of "Aussie pigs keep out, opposition will result in decapitation". >>

Yeah right, Banjo. Duh.

Ooo look! There's some of those Aussie pigs flying past my window...