The problem is they had no books to account for when justice was reached. Their justice was administered on their emotions at the time.

Gee Philo, do you travel back in time (perhaps in Dr Who's tardis) to speak so authoratively?

Pericles said: "You talk compassion and tolerance when it suits your book, but your underlying message is exactly the same as Mosley's: every intelligent person should reject difference, and unite in defence against change of any kind."

Your gratuitous overuse of hyperbole is tiresome. Since when did cohesion, harmony, practicality and functionality become inherently racist? It's obvious that you are completely antipathetical toward the modern concept of the nation-state, defined by shared culture and/or ethnicity. May I ask in relation to Australia - what kind of self-abasing individual would peddle such a cult of division?

let me pose a question.

Does there come a point when the costs and hassles of integrating/assimilating migrant groups or nationalities should cause us to stop all immigration of the group?

if so what should be the criteria?

The costs of absorbing any migrant are quite large, infrastructure provision, training, welfare, social security etc. (at least $20,000 to $30,000 per migrant)

These costs are borne by the existing population, so I think it is reasonable to examine the costs involved; especially if there are extra demands and costs because of the need for extra policing or welfare to deal with problems.

Interesting numbers, last word. Where do they come from?

>>The costs of absorbing any migrant are quite large, infrastructure provision, training, welfare, social security etc. (at least $20,000 to $30,000 per migrant)<<

On that basis, the cost to Australia of inward migration since the end of WWII has been between $120 and $180 billion dollars.

Where did this money come from? Where did it go? Did we make it ourselves? Is it still in Australia or did we send it overseas?

I learned many years ago a very important fact: that money has absolutely no value until it moves. And the fact is, it has to move from somewhere to somewhere else in order to be counted, so it is important to understand the source and destination before you go around saying it "cost" this or that.

It is economic activity that creates growth and wealth. The six million who have arrived on our shores since 1945 have been needing stuff and buying stuff, and thereby creating employment and prosperity for us all.

And you have a problem with that?

What a puzzling reproach, Oligarch.

>>Your gratuitous overuse of hyperbole is tiresome.<<

My OED defines hyperbole as "a figure of speech consisting in exaggerated or extravagant statement, used to express strong feeling or produce a strong impression, and not intended to be understood literally"

Please believe me, in my responses to Boaz' rabble-rousing rants, I mean every word to be taken literally.

But you also ask a reasonable question.

>>Since when did cohesion, harmony, practicality and functionality become inherently racist?<<

The answer is of course that cohesion, harmony, practicality and functionality don't ever become inherently racist.

But you knew that, didn't you?

What you really meant was that in your view, Boaz is promoting "cohesion, harmony, practicality and functionality", and therefore cannot possibly be deemed racist.

I beg to differ. I believe that he is promoting a particularly insidious form of racism, using his religious beliefs to verbally assault people he disapproves of, and to encourage others to follow in his footsteps. His campaign of "ONE NATION,ONE RACE, ONE CULTURE" (his capitals, not mine) is a pale but recognizable copy of the tactics used by Oswald Mosley in England in the 1930s, which is why I have chosen to relabel it "Ein Reich, ein Volk, ein Führer".

And even though that might be seen as "extravagant statement, used to express strong feeling or produce a strong impression", it is most certainly intended to be taken literally.

Please also believe me when I say I'm only trying to save him from the consequences of his folly.

A beautiful English, Last Word: "need for extra policing or welfare".

It is utterly unclear, whether this advanced linguistics deals with a corporate welfare, on which taxpayer billiards are being spent to sustain so-called "local industries", or only non-Anglos being rejecting in advance from any professional deployment for their low-race biology and some natives kept on dole to increase a pressure on being allowed to be employed?

Pericles, a land with near zero research provided uses advances from overseas only and Mosley is among the cliches, perhaps.