"Why not debate the evidence rather than reverting again to name calling?"

At least three people already have, and a couple have indicated that your 'contribution' just takes parts the research out of context. Why aren't responding to them, but instead using the old 'Poor me, I'm so persecuted' line?

Time to stop wasting time on this thread methinks.

I think this statement kinda gives you away, The Realists.

Just a tad.

>>We can either open our mind and accept that multiculturalism has some disadvantages, or chose a closed minded point of view<<

This is classic Boaz-speak.

"You can either open your mind and accept that I'm right, or admit that your mind is closed to argument."

Sounds very, very familiar.

There are no disadvantages to multiculturalism itself. But it is seen as a disadvantage by people who prefer to deal only with people as much like themselves as possible. This is an understandable, but ultimately pointless, stance.

The world has forever been in a constant state of movement. Entire tribes migrated huge distances, long before Creationists believe the world came into existence. Improved communications and simpler, cheaper travel has, every century, every decade and even every year, brought everyone that much closer together.

Not simply geographically, but in terms of interdependency as well.

The basic fact is that we cannot pretend it isn't happening. We cannot prevent it from happening. So the only intelligent course of action is to make it work for us.

Unless of course you prefer to live your life in a permanent state of disappointment.

Or warfare.

There are no other choices.

Everyone knows that multiculturalism has benefits and it also creates challenges. The positives include we can all see that we are made in God's image. Positives also include learning of other cultures and forming friendships around the globe.It is obvious to anyone who can see that we have all inherited the adamic nature. Because secularist deny the obvious they come up with silly little non discriminatory policies that invite people here who don't share their same secular or Christian values. Many of these people must laugh as we provide bucket loads of welfare. If ever we were to be attacked they would rush to the aid of the attackers. England, France and any other place where Islam has a toe has proven to be nothing short of a diaster. We are foolishly following the same path.

'TheRealists'

Without resorting to name-calling and so forth, I think it's quite clear that at the very least, your posts are misleading your view.

Your initial statement, that you would love to believe multiculturalism works etc, combined with the sarcastic nature of your post, appears to be an attempt to position yourself as one with just a passing interest, who has found this study and is presenting it for discussion.

In fact, your site shows that this is not some mere passing interest, rather, it is an ongoing agenda you appear to have.
Thus, in my opinion, your initial post is designed to make people believe you're really interested in seeing multiculturalism work, but regrettably, you've come to believe it does not.

I believe a more accurate supposition is that you hate what multiculturalism stands for and you're attempting to win converts to your view.
The speed with which you cry foul and position yourself as a victim of taunts, instead of addressing the more substantial claims, doesn't give me much confidence either.

To get to what appear to be the core points brought up here:
1) Pericles pointed out the inevitability of aspects of multiculture. More constructive suggestions in managing social cohesion and accepting the inevitable might be more productive than yet another predictable spray about minorities.
2) Antonios has pointed out some of the difficulties migrants face. Others have pointed out that favouring neighbours and friends might be an alternative face of community interaction.
3) As Pericles mentions your "admit I'm right or admit to being closed minded" is rather childish.
4) As has been mentioned by posters, an overriding respect for Australian culture is mentioned as part of the official manifesto.

Perhaps your site would be better characterised as a 'minority-hate' site, insofar as perhaps you don't target a particular race.

I notice that no-one else has picked you up on it Boaz, but I for one would sure like to know more about the Nunawading slur.

>>...one ethnic group... used corrupt methods of manipulating council to fund the centre, and then promptly named it "The (ETHNIC NAME)centre of Nunawading". The council had to virtually threaten to cut off all means of life to them until they re-branded it 'Community' centre.<<

Details please. With references.

Because as it stands, you are splashing around innuendo of decidedly criminal conduct (corruption) without bothering to present any evidence.

Since the centre is clearly now known as the Nunawading Community Centre, we only have your word for its previous title.

http://www.whitehorse.vic.gov.au/page/page.asp?page_Id=238

Please, tell us a few facts about this latest claim of yours, that leads straight into your conclusion that:

>>As I've long said .. multi culturalism simply facilitates ethnic minorities trying to advance their own cultural agenda at the expense of the host culture. It's a fact of life, with ample evidence. Why even bother arguing against this?<<

"The (ETHNIC NAME)centre of Nunawading" clearly represents to you some form of "proof statement".

But those of us who have watched you at work over the years know better than to take you at face value. Jailed Pastors, and all that.

So come on, you know the drill. Let's have a look at the detail.

The anticipation of your providing chapter and verse of a scandal of mammoth proportions will undoubtedly keep me awash with adrenalin.

TurnRightThenLeft: "Perhaps your site would be better characterised as a 'minority-hate' site, insofar as perhaps you don't target a particular race."

No, I wouldn't even afford them that. If you look the site over, its only some cultures that are targeted copiously and consistently: Asian and black, (including indigenous, despite the fact from their point of view, we are the immigrants!).

eg. http://therealists.com.au/?p=92