Shockadelic - If they admit *this* people/culture/religion can't and won't fit into the West, it brings the *rest* into question too.
And they can't allow that can of worms to be opened.

I don't think I'm totally au fait with your argument. Are you suggesting that rejecting the politically correct view of islamification is unsustainable & that if we are to reject prophet followers then we must also reject ANY and all migrants ?? I may be construing something you didn't intend, hence the request for clarification.

Personally I perceive a GINORMOUS difference between islamics and every other mob thats ever lobbed here. Firstly the others have, by and large, left their troubles behind whereas islamics not only bring their historical issues but also constantly create new ones. Secondly, the others have come from societies with idealogies really not that much different from those in Australia whereas islamic idealogy is inherently totally incompatible with any other on planet earth. Thirdly, no other idealogy bar islam extols the 'women are chattels / reward for exterminating opposition / we will never integrate' features

Shockadelic,
I agree with you, especially under labor as they follow ideologies.

But there is a small light at the end of the tunnel.

In their last term the Howard government dropped the multicultural word and were just allowing MC to die out. I have no reason to not expect this to continue if they take office again. The current PM raised MC on a couple of occasions but it did not grow wings.

Anyway I intend to keep presure on the incoming mob to drop MC officially and then reconsider the non-discrimitary immigration policy. It has taken 40 years for them to wake up to the harm of MC as they are slow learners, so do not expect overnight success in not allowing those groups in that have shown they will not integrate.

However we have to keep on keeping on.

Belly - You AGAIN seem to have ignored the questions please be so kind as to back up your conclusions and comments.

Quote "you, stifle true debate" Please explain how you arrived at that conclusion?

I assume you will ignore the question you have a habit of making childish comments then failing to elaborate or answer questions regarding what you say.

Here are some questions I am still waiting for an answer to.

1) Your comment ""Philip S said by inference this man deserved to be MURDERED*
Would you both care to comment, or explain what you meant?"

The question you have failed to answer 6 times.
Can you please explain what part of my post infers what you allege it to infer?"

2) Your comment "You ordered me away from one of your threads"

Another question you fail to answer.
Please provide a link to this alleged incident."

Again I would like to remind you of a statement you made but don't seem to be able to abide by. Quote "I come here for intellectual stimulation, not the very opposite."

Poirot,

I have been delayed.

I don’t know about Fox News- I have never watched it. I just agree with Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the founders of South Park who don’t particularly like conservatives but despise liberals and their moral superiority and sophistry. Trey and Matt just don’t like any extremists you see, like myself, and I do consider progressives to be extremists. One extreme creates another, such as the Tea Party and others out there that we’re seeing. I just take the middle ground.

Howdy, Constance,

Do you not consider it a tad "extreme" to refer to ordinary opinionated people as extremists because they hold different views to your own?

Calling people with a left-wing bent "neo-Marxists", for instance, is a little over-the-top.

Seems a trifle reactionary to so fulsomely categorise people with whom you have next to no acquaintance.

Especially from someone who claims to take the "middle ground".....

Lexi

Why do I always get the same words from you -“personal attacks” (sounds emotional) - “Why not argue at an intelligent level not an emotional one?” I would have thought logic was included in intelligence. Again, how can you discuss the topic on this thread when you claim you don’t know anything about Islam and refuse to learn, listen or see?. You present no argument and only impede it with emotive broken record reaction, as usual. Don't you have a sense of inquiry?

You take things too personally. Grow up.

Neo Marxists equals New Left equals Global Authority versus Individual Liberty. This is the dominating phenomenal mindset that is occurring.

This is what Don Aitkin and Mark Christenson also seem to be saying in their articles. Dependance on the latest dogma and conforming nonetheless.

“Can someone still be classed as a neo-Marxist if they drive a ferrari?” Yes…it is also permissible to wear elegant hats, like yourself under their dogma. This is how weird the New Left are, but they are status seekers afterall.

I use to be partial to the Left once. The New Left are so easy to spot and always so boringly predictable.

I don't particularly like categorising people, but this is what old style liberals have to contend with these days