The MDS doesn’t go far enough say multiculturalists.
I say the MDS goes too far.

http://www.immi.gov.au/about/stakeholder-engagement/_pdf/people-of-australia.pdf

“We are multicultural because we choose to be” p9
Who chooses to be?
If you don’t toe the line you are a racist who will ultimately be criminalized.
There is no choice involved.
Multiculturalism is being imposed on Australia.

“It suits our social and economic needs” p9
How can it suit our social needs to have no-go zones where non-immigrants fear to enter?
How can it suit our economic needs to have some immigrants who represent a heavy welfare burden, as is the Danish experience? As is anecdotally our experience but who will tell us?

“Many Australians of Irish descent might make the same claim: that there were profound cultural differences – and deep tensions – among the settlers from the beginnings of European occupation.“ P10
How then can even more profound cultural differences not lead to even deeper tensions?

“To assure all who live here of the right to live in keeping with their cultures and languages” p12
Even when their cultures are antithetical to ours?

“To expressions of intolerance it will respond with strength – and where it is warranted, with the force of the law” p15
Now we come to the crunch.
Ever the totalitarian’s answer.
The multicultural solution? Ban free speech by criminalizing it.

“That the government establish an anti-racism strategy” p18
And we all know that you can’t have an anti-racism strategy without teeth can you?
Free speech would be criminalized under an "anti-racism" strategy.

Multiculturalism is a handshake not a division and its about time people like you woke up to the fact. I said before when the ship is sinking your only going to look for a colour of your choice.

How small minded you are.

TTM

Troll.

MDS might or might not threaten free speech, certainly it wouldnt be PC to observe those most in favour of such trendy feelgood exercises tend not to be those directly affected by the outcome.
Emotions will run high on the subject, particularly when examples like Tamworth and Adelaide arise. Maybe if these poor folks had to eek out an existence in Canberra, which generally involves theft and/or rape in their culture, policy and practices would more accurately reflect the public opinion.
If people want to fit in, work and pay their taxes, follow our strange customs and practices (whilst remembering the better aspects of their own), respect the rule of law (and equality of females), smile and say G'day etc etc... These types should be welcomed. Those that cannot deal with these simple ideas should return to whence they came forthwith. Of course, indigenous folks present a slightly different challenge once again.

Proxy, I didn't know you were an Indigenous Australian?
If so, you are certainly right to feel as you do.

Unfortunate Proxy it is already happening.

Not too long ago I was visiting a very large Govt authority and happen to sit in on one of their staff pep talks about harassment.

Their spokespersons were proudly citing examples of how they had been proactive in handling what they identified as harassment. One example involved two employees, who whilst having lunch in the staff canteen, were overheard discussing “how they would handle the situation in the middle east” a woman who was sitting at a nearby table “took offence”, reported the incident, and according to the spokeperson they were “both sacked”.

The same spokesperson warned that distribution or displaying of revealing photographs –which included swim suited models- was a sackable offence, but cited exceptions such as one employee who originated from PNG, a background that apparently made it “culturally appropriate” for him to display pictures of his semi-naked relatives & associates.

“Diversity” when used in the multicultural context is a weaselword. It fosters the furphy that merely having people from different cultural backgrounds leads to diverse thinking and solutions.

The only diversity that matters is ability to think differently .

And,hey, aren’t we continually being lectured –on other threads – that characteristics like skin colour , religious affliction or ethnic plumage, are of little consequence!

Any criticism born of ignorance, mistrust
or hatred is not only ineffectual, it is
harmful and elicits equally pointless
and damaging responses.

Why do we assume a stranger is not like
ourself? Why do we assume that they
have a reduced capacity for human feeling?
Why do we assume that we love more deeply
than they do?

Why do we have hostile agendas against others
who we don't really know when extremists and
trouble-makers exist every where - including
amongst ourselves? Why do we divide people into
"them" and "us?"

Prejudice had made damned experts of us all!

Unfortunately, opinions like this exist in 2010. I would like to know what makes you think you can speak on my behalf? When you say they should fit into 'our' culture, I would be interested to know what your idea of 'our' culture is? White anglo? Well I guess I fit into that category being that I'm of Irish heritage. What about religion? Catholic or Christian fit your template for Australian culture? Ok, well that's one down for me as I'm Muslim. Oh that's right, we should say G'day...because Hi or hello or Shalom or Melhaba is just plain ethnic and unAustralian. Well, I can honestly say I very rarely if ever greet friends and strangers alike, with G'day, preferring for the more foreign greeting of hey or hi.

I am proud to be Australian. Proud to be part of a nation who at least is attempting, if somewhat unsuccessfully, to move beyond its troubled past. It's interesting how people like you are happy to extend a friendly hand to other nations in order to support a lifestyle reliant on their exploitation however speedily withdraw that hand when it suits you. I have news for you this is not 'our' home, unless of course you are Indigenous. You are as ethnic as the rest of us. Australia will never be a homogenous society and I celebrate the fact. Assimilation is an archaic and thankfully fast dying ideology.

You mention not being able to enter some areas due to increased crime rates. Surely, you are not supposing to suggest that only migrants commit crime? And surely, you do not suggest that if we close our borders suddenly all Australia's issues will be solved? Anyway one could go on pointing out the holes in your theory but really, if you are of the opinion that an Australian culture exists that is exclusive of cultural diversity, then you exist in a different reality to the rest of us and thus any further explanation is bound to fall on deaf ears.

Pax, If you are Muslim, your values are not those of Australia or the West. You follow the words and religion of Mohammud. You have submitted to the values of Allah. If you don't understand, take a look at the countries in which Islam dominates - that is what you represent.

You don't have to say G'day... but you should, as a true Australian, support freedom of speech, religion, equality and separation of religion and state. However, as a Muslim, I doubt if you understand these simple ideas. You might enjoy the benefits of these rights, and you might even say that you accept these ideals, but you and your Imams and co-religionists work night and day to end these rights.

I am amused by the reference to "trouble past" - Are you condemning Australia for its sins only or do you dare look beyond the immediate and consider the ideology that you have adopted and its many sins? Or is is it that some people doing evil are bad (Australia, for example) but others doing worse are wonderful, so much that you say "Praise be upon him" after the name of one of them. What is it?

Horus and Kactuz,
It's refreshing to hear some sanity.

Foxy,
<<Why do we assume a stranger is not like ourself?>>
We read the texts on which their socio-politico-religio ideology is based and we look at the aggregate effect of the application of that ideology.
Then we see that they can never be like us unless we submit to their supremacist ideology, and then we'll be like them.

MDS P10 “Often they came from countries with which only a few years earlier we had been at war.”
Islam remains in a perpetual (I’m exaggerating, it’s only been 1400 years) state of war with us, yet we refuse to acknowledge it. Even today Islam continues to refer to the West as Dar al Harb, the house of war.

MDS P11 “In every way, immigration has made our cities, suburbs and towns, richer, livelier places, and our country a better one.”
In every way? Benbrika? Bankstown? Cronulla?
Richer?
How much does it cost to monitor the internal terrorist threat?
What is the welfare cost of immigration?
(Insert your own "racist" question here)

MDS P12 “Sound policy rejects all measures that encourage long term dependence.”
Just what are the statistics on welfare dependence, culture by culture.
You can’t find out because that would be racist
A recent study by the Danish govt revealed that each Islamic immigrant represents an average net 300,000 euro cost in federal social assistance.

MDS P15 “The objective of a harmonious multicultural Australia must be pursued not just with idealism, but also with an acute and informed understanding of reality and a healthy dose of pragmatism.”
So what does the Koran teach, in reality?
The fact is, if you quote directly from the Koran or even quote terrorists quoting directly from the Koran you will be condemned and ultimately criminalized. Think Stephen Smith on Geert Wilders’ Fitna.

HAHA and now true ignorance rears its ugly head. I was raised a Catholic for 30 years before making a very informed decision to follow a different spiritual path. While a Catholic, did I believe blindly in everything taught by the Catholic church. No dear sir, I did not. Do you question every Christian follower whether they follow blindly the teachings of the Pope or every single priest in the Western world? No I'm sure you do not. But funnily enough, as a Muslim you assume I agree with and follow blindly every Imam? If you took the time to make an informed decision, and had the intellectual ability to separate what is religious practice and what is cultural practice you might realise and I say might with deep hesitation for someone who would comment as you just have may never have the necessary skills for informed decision making,you just may see a beautiful religion and the beautiful people who follow it beneath the surface.

I don't expect as much from you however, stay with your views, thankfully you are a minority, at least in a circle of educated and world travelled people. And next time you would like to question my values as an Australian, I may ask you how much you can ever offer this country with your narrow minded views. Open your eyes. We are all human beings. Australia is a country built upon diversity and whose culture is rich because of this, I hope some day you learn to enjoy it.

You know what Proxy, I could present counter arguments and statistics for every comment you have made thus far. But to be honest, I can't be bothered. Your views are far to ignorant to comment upon. If you want to live in your little isolated, fear-filled world, go for it. This isn't about freedom of speech, this is about intolerance. You are a racist at least be open about it instead of hiding behind some righteous cause.

pax,

This has nothing whatsoever to do with race.
It has everything to do with the true nature of Islam.

Vijay Kumar says it so much better than me:

"The Islamization of America should be the primary concern of Americans because Islamic imperialism poses an existential threat to the US and all mankind.

America was conceived as a free constitutional republic that is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Islam was conceived as a totalitarian theocracy that is of Islam, by Islam, and for Islam. The Quran is the antithesis of the United States Constitution. They are diametrically opposed. I don’t say that as some Hegelian abstraction: I mean that these two documents are ideological opposites of each other in their most basic purposes and goals.

The purpose of our Constitution is to secure and guarantee to all people the greatest possible freedom. The purpose of Islam is for all people to submit to Islam, and only Islam—not just spiritually, but politically and secularly, in every aspect of law and life.

These two purposes could not possibly be in greater opposition.

Our constitutional republic is built upon the foundation of separation of church and state, with a representative form of government that derives all of its power from the will of the people, framed by a Constitution that is the supreme law of the land.

Islam is built on a foundation of church and state being one, an inseparable autocratic form of government that derives all of its power solely from the will of Allah, framed exclusively by Islamic law—which Islam holds to be divine, supreme, and immutable.

So the danger that Islam poses to America is that Islam, at its core, is ideologically at war with our Constitution. It is a declared war against everything our Constitution stands for. This is a war of polarized ideologies, and they are irreconcilable.

Every conflict we have with Muslims and Islamic nations everywhere around the world arises from that one very simple fact. All other “explanations” are wrong, and so lead to no solutions, only endless turmoil."

http://www.faithfreedom.org/wordpress/?p=9682

Really? Do you really want to offer America as an example of what we should strive to imitate? Why doesn't that surprise me. Islamic Imperialism? I think you are the one who is mixing religion with politics. I think you should investigate the history of Turkey, perhaps research a little bit about Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and what he fought for in Turkey. The examples you give I can counter with just as many examples of Christian fundamentalism and as far as Imperialism goes I don't even want to begin.

How do you relate this with Islam, a spiritual and religious belief? And why do you insist on discussing issues that are cultural and political not religious? I am not here to justify my belief system nor challenge yours. What I challenge is your comment that because I am Muslim I do not represent Australian culture. My grandfather fought for this country, my brother has published books in this country, my father ran a successful business and my mother raised 6 children, who in turn have raised their own children. I have achieved academically and volunteered for many years in various community organisations. Can you please address your comments and explain how my VALUES are not Australian. Furthermore, what are your credentials to be the sole judge to what count as Australian Values?

Nice to see pax sticking it up our resident sockpuppet troll :)

Proxy you talk about freedom of religion and yet continue to offend my spiritual beliefs and intelligence with ridiculous, narrow minded political propaganda. So, when you discuss freedom of speech and freedom of religion you should include....so long as the religion is Christian and the speech does not challenge your views.

pax,
<<What I challenge is your comment that because I am Muslim I do not represent Australian culture.>>
<<Can you please address your comments and explain how my VALUES are not Australian. >>
Are you addressing me or Kactuz who said:
"Pax, If you are Muslim, your values are not those of Australia or the West."?
I never said that your values are not Australian.
I quoted Vijay Kumar to convey the point that Islam is antithetical to Western civilization.
I can't say it any better than him. Read the link above.
Islam is a socio-politico-religio ideology.
Islam teaches global Islamic supremacy.
Islam teaches submission by all to Allah.
Islam teaches death to the infidel. Literally.
I don't know whether you're practising taqiyyah or you are just delusional as to what Islam actually teaches.
Islamic values, as stated in the Koran, the Hadith, the Sunna and in Sharia Law are in opposition to Australian values.
<<So, when you discuss freedom of speech and freedom of religion you should include....so long as the religion is Christian and the speech does not challenge your views.>>
This is a stunning inversion of the truth.
I am not trying to stop your free speech.
Islam is trying to stop free speech all around the globe.
Using both lawfare, at every level of governance from the UN down,
and death threats to those who criticise Islam or its miserable prophet.
This process is being aided and abetted by dhimmis such as CJ, who even now hasn't bothered reading up on Islam.
As for freedom of religion!
In its 1400 year quest for global submission Islam has been responsible for more misery than any of us can comprehend.
And it continues to this day:
http://www.politicalislam.com/blog/category/bulletin-of-christian-persecution/
It cannot stop until the dangerous ideology of Islam is rejected by all humankind.
"Religion of pax".
What a travesty.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! You poor disillusioned fool.

pax,
The same rigorous disputation.
The same attention to the facts.
CJ couldn't have said it more eloquently.
You're not CJ's sockpuppet troll are you?

Whatever helps you sleep at night is what I am :)

I don't need to offer any more on this debate as your own words show your ignorance. I take comfort in knowing the majority of Australians are tolerant and accepting human beings who judge a person individually rather than on their nationality, culture or religion. Goodluck for the future!

Sorry all, but I'm taking this discussion a little off-topic for a direct question to KMB/HermanYutic/Proxy.

Yesterday in another thread, you wrote:

>> Homosexuality is not my favourite subject.
>> My favourite subject is the global Islamic jihad.
>> As Australia pursues its multicultural death wish it will become increasingly Islamicised.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3592#86489

Irrespective of which is your favourite - homosexuality, Islam, incest, Barack Obama - you clearly put huge amounts of energy and intellect into your obsessions. You're across the conservative viewpoint on a wide range of issues, which is more than I can say for many of our conservative political leaders.

I get a bit tired of conservatives claiming that they're being shouted down by the forces of political correctness, when in fact the Australians publicly representing the views you espouse have generally proven themselves to be simple-minded (raise your hand, Pauline Hanson), or mercenary (take a bow, Alan Jones).

From the core of my being I disagree with everything you've written here, but I can see that there's a gap in this country's public discourse for an articulate, informed and honest neo-con.

[continued]

[from previous]

So my question is, if you really are concerned, indeed, if you genuinely love Australia, what are you doing here on OLO? Apart from enraging the handful of people who hang around here, your anonymous posts in these pages achieve nothing. If your concerns stem from genuine convictions, then it seems to me you have an obligation to air them in forums a little more transformative than OLO.

Or are you already spreading your wings?

[from the advance questions posted to the ABC's Q&A program http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/ for tomorrow night]

>> To Christine Milne
>>
>> Why is discussing muslim immigration despicable?
>>
>> Can you name any European country that has not had major
>> problems with muslim immigration?
>>
>> France has 10% muslims and 751 official no-go zones (muslim
>> enclaves) where where police, ambulances and fire brigade wont go.
>>
>> Why would Australia be any different? Why take the risk?
>>
>> Michael

>> To PENNY WONG
>>
>> Some Immigrants come here and do an horrific, abhorent, depraved,
>> digusting, inhumane, medievil thing.to Australian children.
>>
>> Those Aussie kids are disfigured and psychologically scarred for life,
>> have lifelong health complications, problems giving birth and will
>> not experience orgasm.
>>
>> Why dont you stand up in parliament and speak about this? Why
>> dont you ask why nobody has ever been prosecuted for this?
>> Why dont you give a damn?
>>
>> Michael

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/your-questions-box.htm

Dear Proxy,

Extremists exist in all religions.
There are Christians in America
who blow up abortion clinics. There
are 'rapture' Christians who yearn
for nuclear war because they interpret
it as the "Armageddon" which, according
to their bizarre but disturbingly
popular interpretation of the book of
Revelation, will hasten the Second
Coming. And yes, there are fundamentalists
who believe in the literal truth of the
Koran. But these people are a
minority. To tar all followers with
the same brush of extremism - is not only
foolish but bigoted and tends to suggest
a hostile agenda on your part.

You need to accept the challenge and get
beyond the labels and remember -
your bigotry
doesn't have to define you.
Open your mind!

Foxy,

According to Wikipedia, there have been 7 abortion related murders in 17 years, 6 assaults/threats in 6 years and 12 cases of property damage in 26 years in the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence
There is no doctrinal justification in Christianity for anti-abortion violence.

According to TheReligionofPeace.com, there have been 15,234 fatal incidents (actual fatalities far higher) attributable to Islamic fundamentalism since 9/11/01.
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
There is ample doctrinal justification in Islam for killing.

(There is also ample doctrinal justification in Islam for rape, wife-beating, child marriage, death penalty for apostasy, death penalty for insulting the prophet, etc, etc).
Estimates of deaths resulting from Islamic fundamentalism throughout history are around 270 million.
http://www.politicalislam.com/tears/pages/tears-of-jihad/

<<And yes, there are fundamentalists
who believe in the literal truth of the
Koran. But these people are a
minority.>>

Any minority out of 1.2 billion people is an awful lot of people.
Moreover the fundamentalists have Islamic doctrine on their side and are not afraid of wielding this like a sword over "moderate" Muslims.
How many of these will we welcome into Australia under the misguided dystopian policy of multiculturalism?

If, in the face of all the evidence, you cannot see the existential threat presented by Islam then there is no hope for you.

You may be "nice" but your mind is welded shut,
which is the definition of a bigot.

Open your mind to reality Foxy.

Ask yourself, why is the Wales government spending £25.3 million to combat honour related violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage?
http://www.egovmonitor.com/node/35011
It must be part of the Taffy culture!

Dear Proxy,

Just a reminder:

Hatred, bigotry and intolerance
are not Christian values.

Like so many of your ilk, Proxy, you cannot resist being just a smidgeon misleading when you mount your favourite whack-a-mozzie hobbyhorse, adding just a tinge of exaggeration along the way.

>>Ask yourself, why is the Wales government spending £25.3 million to combat honour related violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage?<<

One obvious answer is, that they are doing no such thing.

Even the article you refer us to will tell you this. You should read your own propaganda.

"The Strategy includes a number of initiatives and additional funding of £1 million is being made available to deliver these, taking the total budget to £4.7 million for 2010."

That's not even close to your figure.

You would also notice, if your agenda hadn't blinded you, that the crimes you cite are but a tiny part of the entire programme, which includes:

"A new project to tackle prostitution and trafficking in North Wales

Increasing funding so that all One-Stop Shops in Wales receive support

Developing a national training strategy to ensure that professionals in all sectors recognise and know how to deal with violence against women and the potential impact on children

Continuing to fund on going publicity campaigns focused on challenging attitudes

Consulting on the inclusion of issues relating to violence against women in the Personal and Social Education Framework

A stronger focus on forced marriage, honour based violence and female genital mutilation issues including training, expanding existing education programmes, and publicity [Aha! There it is!]

Providing financial training for key staff working in refuges and independent domestic abuse advisors to enable them to offer well informed financial advice to victims

Working with NUS Cymru to develop a multi-media campaign on personal safety for students on campus settings

Working with British Transport Police to improve the protection available to women on rail transport and railway stations."

So do tell, Proxy, why you chose to tell us that the Welsh Government is "spending £25.3 million to combat honour related violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage", when you know perfectly well that you were simply strirring up fear and loathing?

No Foxy,
They are Islamic values.
I can't express it any better than the Koran and Hadith:
* Infidels are your sworn enemies (Sura 4:101).
* Be ruthless to the infidels (Sura 48:29).
* Make war on the infidels who dwell around you (Sura 9:123, 66:9).
* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day (Sura 9:29).
* Strike off the heads of infidels in battle (Sura 47:4).
* If someone stops believing in Allah, kill him (al-Bukhari 9:84:57).
* Take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends (Sura 5:51, 60:13).
* Never be a helper to the disbelievers (Sura 28:86).
* Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (Sura 2:191).
* No Muslim should be killed for killing an infidel (al-Bukhari 1:3:111).
* The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land (Sura 5:33).

pericles,
Now that I've got your attention:
What's a reasonable cost to Western society of importing Islamic practises such as honour related violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage?
£25.3 million is too high for you to tolerate
but, say, £1 million is okay?

Interesting that our sockpuppet troll began this silly thread with a claim about "free speech" being threatened, yet I see no evidence of restriction of his "right" to vilify Muslims - even when based on a bald-faced lie, as demonstrated by Pericles above.

Mind you, it might be one reason that he changes his name so regularly. What an exciting life he must have.

Dear Proxy,

By far the majority of Muslims today
live their lives without recourse to
violence. The Koran is like a pick-and-mix
selection. If you want peace, you can find
peaceable verses. If you want war, you can find
bellicose verses... the same goes for the Bible.
Both Christianity, just as much as Islam,
teaches people that unquestioned faith is a
virtue.

However, I can see that you're on a roll,
and will only see evil in the religion of
others, not in your own.

Voltaire got it right long ago:

"Those who can make you believe absurdities,
can make you commit atrocities."

So did Bertrand Russell:

"Many people would sooner die than think.
In fact they do."

If at first you don't succeed
Blame a Minority!

Foxy,
<<The Koran is like a pick-and-mix
selection. If you want peace, you can find
peaceable verses. If you want war, you can find
bellicose verses>>
The peaceful verses were written during Mohammed's Meccan period, before he attained military power.
The bellicose verses were written during Mohammed's Medinan period, after he attained military power.
The bellicose verses abrogate the peaceful verses.
This means, doctrinally, that the peaceful (earlier) verses are meaningless because the bellicose (later) ones contradict them.
Mohammed no longer needed to maintain cordial relations with other tribes because he had attained the power he needed to make them submit.
But there really is no point trying to explain such things to a person who has clearly surrendered their reason to their ideology.
You, Foxy, are a dhimmi.

Dear Proxy,

And what are you?
The dark side of Absolutism,
no less!

Morality is doing what is right
no matter what you are told.
Religion is doing what you are told
no matter what is right.

Why single out Islam. Christianity has
much that can also be criticized if you
choose to selectively pick from the Bible.
Try googling "evil bible" and see what comes
up.

You say that my mind is welded shut?
Dear me Proxy, yours is way beyond welding.
A closed mind is like a closed book - just
a piece of wood. You're not really in a
position to have something worth saying. Your
criticism is indeed born of ignorance, mistrust
and hatred and it's harmful - and the more you
post the more foolish you sound.

But I've had enough!

The mind of a bigot is like a pupil of the eye.
The more light you pour upon it,
the more it will contract!

As far as I'm concerned, you've lost all credibility
with your vitriolic postings. From now on I'll simply
scroll past when I see your name. I urge others to
do the same.

I usually can tolerate most posters. But, in your
case I'm making an exception. There's enough hatred
in the world. I won't be a party to adding to it!

Enjoy your gruntlement!
I've had enough of it!

Foxy,
If I am on the dark side of absolutism,
You are on the loopy side of relativism,
With a mind as fragile as a crystal fox.

You ask the most absurd questions, Proxy.

>>What's a reasonable cost to Western society of importing Islamic practises such as honour related violence, female genital mutilation and forced marriage? £25.3 million is too high for you to tolerate but, say, £1 million is okay?<<

"Not one cent" is the answer.

And "because they don't" is the reason.

Now, would you like to ask another question, only this time one that makes some sense.

Foxy,
The Kor'an was compiled by one man in one generation representing his religious world views. The Bible however is an evolution of thought over 3,000 years of culture and beliefs written by and contributed to by hundreds of scholars and thinkers in their day. For Christians the primary thought is expressed by Jesus (and he never wrote a book) and expounded in the writings and lives of those who knew him.

There is no thought of imposing a religious belief or restricting criticism upon the unbeliever, as loving response comes from a free will. Unlees a society is absolutely free the personal lives cannot fulfil their destiny. Even an evil Pharoah, Caesar or Hitler have their day as abhorent as it might have been to remind us what true freedom is about.

Dear Philo,

The conceptual differences between democratic
traditions and totalitarian systems are very great.
The distinction is one between freedom, liberty, and
the right to the pursuit of happiness as opposed to
the interest, control, and domination of the state
over the individual.

The measure of our society over history is our fidelity
to our principles.

People who enjoy the rights of free speech have a duty
therefore to respect other people's rights. A person's
freedom of speech is limited by the rights of others.
Hate speech - defaming people, is against the law in
most civilized countries. All societies, including
democratice ones, put various limitations on what people
may say. They prohibit certain types of speech that they
believe may harm people. It is for that reason that I
am withdrawing from this thread.

Foxy,
Someone has actually done a numerical comparison of abortion killings by "Christians" to terrorist killings by Islamists and arrived at a comparison rate of 45,000:1.
I haven't checked their math but it sounds like random chance to me, I'm sure you'll agree.
The good news is that you may be eligible for a prize, like Finnish academic Tuula Sakaranaho:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/Dhimwits.htm

Posted by Proxy, Monday, 3 May 2010 7:42:49 PM
The peaceful verses were written during Mohammed's Meccan period, before he attained military power.
The bellicose verses were written during Mohammed's Medinan period, after he attained military power.
The bellicose verses abrogate the peaceful verses.
This means, doctrinally, that the peaceful (earlier) verses are meaningless because the bellicose (later) ones contradict them.

There is a difference of interpretation in the Christian and Moslem translations of the book of Moses. The Christians translate a commandment as, thou shall not kill. The Koran translates it as, thou shall not kill unjustly. Not too small a point of difference in the understanding of the premise of the faith and the power vested in people by god in Islam as opposed to Christianity.

The difference is theologically substantial, but minimizes on a practical application basis given that Christians seem to practice the Moslem interpretation.

Proxy to address the enclave issue I have lived overseas for an extended period and I always sought to move into an Aussie enclave, it's a natural inclination we have towards security, physical and emotional. Since the first immigration wave of the 50's we have had, Little Italy, Little Athens, Little Serbia and Croatia, etc in formerly Anglo Saxon suburbs. The difference between the immigration wave of predominantly non Europeans in the 70's in my observation is that the European immigrants assimilated quicker, and the next generation dispersed into the wider suburbs. Whereas the more culturally dis similar immigrants of the 70's moved into one suburb and the subsequent generation moved into adjoining suburbs, producing an enclave and microcosm of their home society. It is an issue, not a racist issue but an assimilation issue.

sonofgloin,
<<It is an issue, not a racist issue but an assimilation issue.>>
It is an Islamic issue
and Islam is not a race.
Nicolai Sennels is a Danish psychologist who worked with juvenile Muslim prisoners.
Two thirds of juvenile prisoners in Denmark are Muslim immigrants.
"Discrimination!" cries the left.
But Sennels examines the "cultural" reasons why they are there.
He is "completely convinced that Muslim integration will never happen to the necessary extent" for reasons explained in the linked interview:
http://frontpagemag.com/2010/05/05/among-criminal-muslims/
The 750+ Sensitive Urban Zones in France, as identified by French authorities are further testament to this unfortunate reality:
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2006/11/the-751-no-go-zones-of-france
This process is already happening in Australia,
as it is in Rotterdam, Malmo, etc, etc.
It will only get worse.
As it has in Rotterdam, Malmo, etc, etc.
And if you think assimilation is the issue, try convincing the multicultural left.
Assimilation is forcing them to lose their cultural identity and adopting our mores and we can't have that can we?
Because their culture is equal to, nay better than, ours!
Assimilation is racist!

Yes, it's the end of life as you know it, Proxy/KMB/HermanYutic et al.

Time to morph into yet another hateful clone.

CJ Morgan,
It is interesting that you are never able to refute what I say with contradicting evidence.
I guess that would go beyond the scope of being a "progressive".
Even so, I hope you are spared the beheadings that await all infidels,
as mandated in the Koran:
"“Remember your Lord inspired the angels with the message: “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: you smite them above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them“" Sura 8:12
Daniel Pearl et al. weren't so lucky:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsgspDyTxDc

Posted by Proxy, Monday, 10 May 2010 4:25:33 PM
“Assimilation is forcing them to lose their cultural identity and adopting our mores and we can't have that can we”?
“Because their culture is equal to, nay better than, ours”!

I read the two articles, Prof Nicolai summed up the politically correct, U.N. charter signing, short sighted administrations with this observation.
Nicolai Sennels,... "about two thirds of all teenagers accused for criminal actions in Copenhagen have a Muslim background. For years poverty gets the blame for the high crime rate among young Muslim men".

This is a truism, but it is a truism for all the poor regardless of creed or culture, particularly when they immigrate to the western world. Prof went into some salient analysis and reported what we already know from observation. The young Muslims are aggressive by nature via cultural input. This same group is commandingly over represented in the criminal stats. That they have an “us and them “mentality.

Except for a percentage of hard core criminality this group fragments into normal societal behaviour, with all the restraints that obligation brings to maturity. The no go areas that now exist where some Middle Eastern and African Muslims have enclaved in the west, this is not the fault of the Muslims. The sort of behaviour exhibited by these young western society Muslims is not and would not be tolerated back where they came from, those societies enforce the law.

We, the weak willed western politically correct plebs have allowed our justice system to become weak and impotent. Why won't the cops go into certain areas, because their governments will not enforce the law of the land, simple as that?

We need a broken window policy of no crime goes unsolved or un punished and we need the government to govern for the safety and betterment of the majority, not the minority. Regarding the Muslim immigrants and anti social behaviour, it's not all Muslim Nationalities, just the Africans and Middle Easterners from my experience. Governments rely on the ethnic vote.

sonofgloin,
Keating's backing of Hilali is salutary:
"Keating, then federal treasurer, and McLeay, an influential backbencher from his party's Right faction, made no bones about their belief that Hilali should stay and lobbied on his behalf.
They were under pressure from the growing local Muslim community in their neighbouring western Sydney seats of Blaxland and Grayndler.
The Lakemba mosque where Hilali was the spiritual leader was in McLeay's electorate.
"It was a local political issue for people who lived in the electorate," said one observer.
"They took the philosophical view that if people in this religious group wanted Hilali to be their spiritual leader, why should they say no?"
But Hurford and other players close to the action take a different view.
They believe that Hilali was ultimately granted permanent residency by the Labor government in 1990 - in a decision made by Keating himself as acting prime minister while Bob Hawke was away - because the decision could help Labor in federal and state politics."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/keating-stopped-sheiks-expulsion/story-e6frg6nf-1111112431305
The larger their presence grows the stronger the lobbying power,
especially with the Labor welfare mentality.
What better way to build a voting bloc?

Proxy,in the vein of every dog has it's day, the Liberals had a similar windfall with the post war immigrants from Europe. In my observation as many came here to leave the Memory of the Reichs reign as left because Joe Stalin was looking and talking strong. The larger part of the influx, were anti socialist and automatic Liberal voters after naturalization, and the odd immigrant nazi sympathiser voted "right" by indoctrination.
My question regarding the Labor party and their grooming of the Middle Eastern vote is do they discriminate administratively against Caucasian immigrants to stack the electorate with politically sympathetic immigrants.