With the report on 730 about the Australian suicide bomber, one has to ask that given he was an Australian Muslim, do we take a stand now, and ban the religion from our country, or do we simply wait until one of these so called Australians commits such a crime here.

I say we should act now and ban the religion, because let's face it, it's the religion that causes the problem, not so much the people.

if its dying..all..by itself
why dirty ya hands..with the likely charge of murder?

but your honur..the corpusss of satanic forces
was near dead...already

so like jesus himself said..
let the dead tend the dead

there that is said
now back to my..lambs thread
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040&page=0#175453

the only reason..i got for getting out of my death bed
[no..leaVE THE REST UNSAID]

RELATED THREAD
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15687

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 116
Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.

Dear Rehctub,

Banning any religion violates the above provision of the Australian Constitution.

rehctub, as a person concerned with civil liberties I'm very hesitant to support this 'banning' practice. As I'm not a supporter of religions in general, to what extent would you want this 'banning' taken, would the Catholic Church be banned because it is rife with pedophiles? What other organisations would you ban, political parties, what other subversive organisations? You can't tell where this might lead, a new law even, where people are charged with "Un-Australian Activity".

How many more times does it have to be said before action is taken. BAN ALL RELIGION outside the home ! We desperately need museums etc ., we could use all those churches for that purpose. All the money tied up in churches would solve all hardship in our community.

<< …let's face it, it's the religion that causes the problem, not so much the people. >>

You reckon, rehctub?

It’s a small number of terribly misguided individuals and small groups that cause the problem, not the religion. These people claim to be acting in accordance with their religion. But they aren’t. They hold extreme and quite perverted interpretations of their religion.

Trying to ban Islam from Australia wouldn't help. It would do just the opposite - it would greatly accentuate the 'us-and-them' mentality and the feeling of unrest within the resident Muslim community, with the probable result of considerably increased conflict.

oops..from
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15687&page=0

<<a gaping loop hole..and made
a mockery of our federal laws...>>

rubbish..
but..

<<Those..opposing the Syrian government..did not want their sons to slip down this hole,..as virtually all embraced Australia..to flee from war...Those supporting the Syrian government..also opposed this loop hole..because of their general concern..over foreign mercenaries and..terrorists allied with al Nusra and al Qaeda.

One Arabic language newspaper..declared that Australia's inaction on this loophole..was driven by another policy:..good riddance to bad rubbish.

If the Australians are helping..to topple the Syrian regime, then this..is in line with the Australian partisan policy..and Bob Carr's suggestion of a presidential assassination.

If these Australians.are killed in combat,..then that
*character..never belonged..*in our country,..so either way we win.

When David Hicks was participating in para-military training in Afghanistan in 2001, the US Military Commission charged him with 'providing material support for terrorism' and he was detained in Guantanamo Bay until 2007.

But when other Australians participate in military activities in the plethora of pro and anti-government 'brigades', they return home to a hero's welcome.

The current law is articulated by the Department of Foreign Affairs travel advise: "it is illegal under Australian law for Australian citizens, including dual citizens, to provide any kind of support to any armed group in Syria.

This includes engaging in fighting for either side, funding training or recruiting someone to fight … Australians who commit these offences while overseas may be prosecuted in Australia" with heavy fines and maximum 10 years imprisonment.

So why has there not been a single arrest, prosecution of conviction reported to the Australian public since the alarm bells were sounded?

Too many of these Australians publicly claim to be offering humanitarian aid to the Syrian refugee epidemic, but their Facebook photos show them posing proudly with guns.

As I argue here you cannot be a muslim and be moderate:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5962&page=0

There are only 2 types of muslims; active and non-active jihadists; all muslims want sharia law and their values to prevail. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either a fool or a muslim.

Islam in the West could be quarantined in so many ways using existing laws especially conspiracy and sedition related laws, not to mention criminal laws dealing with the abuse of children and women.

Failure to start taking a hard line agains Islam will inevitably result in Australia being like other Western nations where once islam numbers exceed about 5% of the population severe civil unrest and enclaving occurs.

Islam is a blight not a religion.

You can't ban a religion. You can prohibit public worship but it's impossible to police what people believe.

And bans on religion don't have a good track record of being effective. The might of the Roman Empire couldn't stamp out Christianity. People have been trying to ban Judaism for centuries with no luck. I don't think we'll be any more successful with Islam, and we don't even have lions to feed the Muslims to.

Cheers,

Tony

cohenite/dynomite..<<There are only 2 types of muslims; active and non-active>>

yes evena muslimmust agree
there are those serving jinn..and those serving god

yyes there aree just two..IN EVERY religion..[too]

but sacred/words are [=]..s/words..youuseone yourself

<<>.jihadists;>>

yes thats their name for ou RULING passsion
some feel passion..too learn..of god via god
others reject god..[se humans come oin two types too

<<..all muslims want sharia law..>>

my brother cowen-ite..[iknoow FOR SURE..thee victims..of sharia..dont want nosharia law..THUS ALL..is clearly WRONG*

deliberatly wrong?
that depends IF YOUR of type one..ot type two*

<<and their values to prevail.>>

<<Anyone who thinks otherwise is either a fool or a muslim.>.

iknow..inot a fool
so thus i..*must be a muslim

IF YOUR..*NOT A FOOL
heh..guess what..YOUR A MUSLIM..TOO*

<<..Islam is a blight not a religion...>>

now hang on...there boy-oh..
as a neo muslim..i..think your..in-correct
[forgive me..my..ignorance..of your infidel-tongue*..;)

i..guess the...blight falls upon..you..

you fool
you could have become..*muslim..like us
but heck you wanna be the fool..*thats cool..too

Rechtub you are aware we share some views in this area, most Australians do.
We however can not ban the religion.
We could change our migrant intake subject to observations we can all see/make
I am unsure the bloke is dead, face it lies are as common as ak47s in that area.
But, watch the flying shoes, we are going to suffer acts of terrorism quite possibly from the 250 odd who left to take part in wars in the middle east.
Some times to tell of an honestly held view starts some looking for reason to name us racist.
Maybe I am, nearly as much as the *worst* from this divisive group.

Banning burqas, minarets, halal food, Islam itself is banning the symptom, not the cause.
The cause is "non-discriminatory" immigration and the high numbers of immigrants.

Rather than mixing together, high numbers encourages a banding together of "types", creating an insular social reality for each group.

The history of Islam is not a history of playing well with others.
They always seek dominance.
That's only natural. Whites have done that too.
Let's stop being so naive about it.

The more "exotic" a people, the less likely they'll fit in.
The less they fit in, the more they turn insular and hostile.

Stop the cause, not the symptoms.
Stop all non-White immigration.

In a few generations, there'll be hardly any sign "they" were here, due to emigration and non-procreation of middle-to-old age persons.
The numbers will reduce to a third the current level or less.

Islam never has and never will be popular in the West.
Cut off the external source and it will vanish.

Shockadelic,

Give us a real shock and define 'white' in the context of your post.

What is not been taken into account is that Islam is a ideology as well
as a religion. It is fascist in nature and the Koran is very
intolerant of those who are not moslems.
Islamists were a problem to their neighbours right from their beginning.
They killed or drove the Jews and the Christians out of the middle east.
They invaded and took over Nth Africa and then Spain which they held for 700 years.
They invaded Europe and were only stopped at the gates of Vienna.
They are still at it, just the tactics have changed.

When their numbers reach a certain level they will demand tax payment,
whose name I forgotten, from every non moslem. This is part of Sharia law.

Islam is a very serious threat to a country like Australia.
We will at some time in the future be engaged in a "civil" war within Australia.

What is not been taken into account is that Christianity is a ideology as well as a religion. It is fascist in nature and the Bible is very
intolerant of those who are not Christians.
Christians were a problem to their neighbours right from their beginning.
They killed or drove the Jews out wherever they went, and attempted numerous and bloody crusades to drive the Muslims out of the middle east.
They invaded and took over most Europe which they held for millennia.
They crushed the native pagan religions under their heel and persecuted them with a passion that makes Wahhabi extremists look like Quakers by comparison.
They ushered in the dark ages and confounded mankind's development by encouraging superstition in place of progress.
They invaded the Americas and killed off the natives. In one particularly nasty case they used biological warfare by way of intentionally and with malice aforethought infecting them with smallpox.
They are still at it, just the tactics have changed.

When their numbers reach a certain level they will demand the prohibition of freedom of belief and worship. This is not a part of the doctrine of any mainstream Christian church but some elements in Christianity still carry on as if they were in the midst of the Crusades.

Christianity isn't a very serious threat to a country like Australia.
It's only crazy people that ever want to start a war and they're outnumbered. But if they tried it on they'd suddenly find themselves faced with staunch opposition from the people who'd just like to quietly get on with their lives.

That applies to the chest-beaters and war-mongers on both sides. We will not take crap from Muslims. But equally, we won't take crap from the people who want to pick pointless fights because they don't like Johnny Foreigner. We don't care about your stupid primitive beliefs but we do care about your jingoism and by crikey we won't take it lying down if you take it too far.

Cheers,

Tony

No, I don't believe we can or should try to ban religion as such.
We already have laws in place to ban and punish terrorist activity that is fought under a religious, or any other, banner.

My husband grew up in an IRA sympathiser town in a very Catholic part of Ireland.
Even so, neither he, nor most of his family, supported the IRA or their terrorist activities.

He said the members of the IRA have long ceased to have anything to do with 'freeing' Ireland from the Protestant English, or to have any religious basis to their being.

They were simply a group of violent people who got off on the so called power of killing or maiming others.
I would suggest it is the same with any of the terrorist groups of today...

Again we just can not ban the religion.
But if we are very brave and honest we can say it is the view of many the trouble is in the religion not its people.
Then confront some truths, not every follower of that God is a threat, but far too many are.
For that matter we need look no further than these pages to see followers of other Gods can be bigoted and uncaring toward others.
What a great world we could begin to build if we had no God, hard in the short term but so promising in the long term.
Let us contemplate the heaven the terrorist followers of this God believe they go to.
70 something virgins!
Has Christian Anderson never ventured so far from reality!
A day of pain and anger following Murder of Australians in the name of this God and a hate so deep we will be forced to ask why we ever imported it.

As long as established religions cop tax exemptions the rest of us (the subsidisers) should be allowed to decide how they operate... seems only fair to me.

Separatism is inherently wasteful and inefficient as most places of worship are underused. Some, little more than one day a week.

Therefore, in this era of 'rationalism' both economic and otherwise, I propose that all monotheistic religions be forced to cooperate and share the same premises.

One god, one place of worship in any locale.

This would be consistent with the Constitution and free up heaps of real estate. Plus, just in case he is not omnipresent, it makes it easier for god to know where s/he/it needs to be in order to be adored.

http://lostislamichistory.com/how-the-british-divided-up-the-arab-world/

HOW..the brits DIVIDED up the world

The development of the modern nation states..throughout the Arab world..is a fascinating and heartbreaking process.

100 years ago,..most Arabs were part of the Ottoman Empire/Caliphate, a large multi-ethnic state based in Istanbul...Today, a political map of the Arab world..looks like a very complex jigsaw puzzle.

http://www.intifada-palestine.com/2009/05/ariel-sharon-we-the-jewish-people-control-america-and-the-americans-know-it/

dont miss reading the quotes

like..Ariel Sharon:”..We,..the Jewish People,
Control America,.and The Americans Know it”

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/interactive/2012/04/2012417131242767298.html

US military bases continue to form a strategic envelope around Iran, although the American withdrawal from Iraq at the end of 2011 may have changed the regional balance somewhat towards Iran's favour. While US forces are scaling back in many parts of the globe due to budget cuts - and have begun a gradual depature from Afghanistan to be completed by 2014 - their international presence remains vast.

From an active-duty force of 1.4 million soldiers, the US has deployed some 350,000 troops to at least 130 foreign countries around the world. Some are at Cold War-era installations, but many are in or near combat zones in the Middle East.

At more than 750 bases..internationally,
*private contractors*..and third-country nationals*{HINT*HINT*}
also form a large percentage of the staff.. in addition to military reservists and civilian employees of the Pentagon.

US military installations in the Middle East serve to keep an eye on Iran,..but their regional footprint was significantly expanded..*well before Iran became the most publicly cited foreign "threat".

There were three reasons
..why the US sought a presence across the Middle East,

http://jafi.org/JewishAgency/English/Jewish+Education/Compelling+Content/Eye+on+Israel/British+Rule

http://i1.wp.com/www.intifada-palestine.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/Ariel.jpg

the plan
http://iamthewitness.com/Protocols-of-Zion.htm

#
We have made a gulf..between the far-seeing Sovereign Power..and the blind force of the people..so that both have lost all meaning,..for like the blind man and his stick,..both*..are powerless apart.

#
In order to incite..seekers after power to a misuse of power
we have set..all forces in opposition..one to another, breaking up their liberal tendencies towards independence.

Of States we have made gladiatorial arenas
where a lot of confused issues contend..

A little more,..and disorders..*and bankruptcy will be universal..

continued..;.#<<Without..any logical*_verification..of them>>

ie..the aforementioned protocols
to..armogeddon

see..zion protocols..[to..the armogeddon..end-plan][general-copy]
http://iamthewitness.com/Protocols-of-Zion.htm

WE..will put..into effect..all..the information
available from science,[guilt]..which our..AGENTUR specialists..>>

media/blogger [useful-idiots]..etc
see..at least..5 more recent shill threads..[like this one]
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15664&page=0

who..have begun..using the..'s'word

..<<have cunningly pieced together.for the purpose of educating their minds in the..direction..we want.[]useful/idiots is the..common-form..of address..[or gloyum]-

DESTRUCTIVE EDUCATION

#..Do not suppose..for a moment that..
these statements are empty words:..think carefully..of
the successes we arranged for..Babblers,bloggers haters hearers..inexhaustible,,,miss-informed[useFUL-idiots]

lobbyists..parties/pr-spin..have turned..into oratorical contests..the sittings of Parliament..and..all..of mens-Administrative Boards.

Bold journalists..and unscrupulous pamphleteers..daily fall upon executive officials.

Abuses of power..will put the final touch..in preparing all institutions..for their overthrow[bankruptcy]..and everything will fly skyward..under the blows of the maddened mob.

POVERTY/hunger/oppression..is..yOUR WEAPON

#All people..are chained down..to heavy toil by poverty,,clever-laws/taxes..even realestagte..creed greed..nationality..race/sex..ever-more firmly than ever.

They were chained..by BONDED-slavery and..CONTRACTED-
serfdom;..from these,..one way and another,..they might free themselves..only..by mob-power.[then as terrorists..get shot.

These could..be settled with,..but..
freedom..from want...they will never..get away...from.

ie.only death..will,..do

We have included..in their constitution..such rights as to..the masses appear fictitious..and not actual rights. [ie corpertte person-hood]..

All these..so-called "Peoples Rights"..can exist only..
in idea,..an idea which can never be realized..by/the..living..in practical life.[only..in..trusts;'..by coroperate-personhood.]

The constitution scales...of these days will shortly break down,
for we have established them..with a certain lack..of accurate balance..in order that they may oscillate...incessantly until they wear through the pivot..on which they turn.[life/liberty/freedumb]

are..your BLOGGERS..the soft/left press?

In the hands of the States..of to-day there is a great force..that creates the movement..of thought..egsistant..in the people, and that is the Press.

The part played by the Press is to keep pointing our requirements supposed to be indispensable, to give voice to the complaints of the people, to express and to create discontent..GLOBALL..as well as..family by family

anything..to..get unthinking thugs
[mobs]..on..the streets..give them..bird-flue[mark 666]..then send them back to their dorms..to quietly die...[its all..in the plan man*

remember..this one was ALLOWED to go public
the real one..not really known to any..police nor politician..nor goyum/mason..or jew..[only zionists][and then..only by need to..know*]

go on..say it isnt so?

http://iamthewitness.com/Protocols-of-Zion.htm
goyum..[any..non-zionists]..will therefore easily become pawns in our game in the hands of men of learning and genius who will be their advisers, specialists bred and reared from early childhood to rule the affairs of the whole world.

# The abstraction of freedom has enabled us to persuade the mob in all countries that their government is nothing but the steward of the people who are the owners of the country, and that the steward may be replaced like a worn-out glove.

# It is this possibility of replacing the representatives of the people which has placed at our disposal, and, as it were, given us the power of appointment.

As is well known to you, these specialists of ours have been drawing to fit them for rule the information they need from our political plans from the lessons of history, from observations made of the events of every moment as it passes.

The GOYIM are not guided by practical use of unprejudiced historical observation, but by theoretical routine without any critical regard for consequent results. We need not, therefore, take any account of them - let them amuse themselves until the hour strikes, or live on hopes of new forms of enterprising pastime, or on the memories of all they have enjoyed.

For them let that play the principal part which we have persuaded them to accept as the dictates of science (theory). It is with this object in view that we are constantly, by means of our press,bloggers etc arousing a blind confidence in these theories.

GET EDUCATED..or get enslaved..[or worse]
the quality/quantity..of bloggers alone indicate..the time draws near

Banning them is not a good idea. It just sends them underground, where they are harder to keep track of, & more dangerous.

Letting them shout their arrogance & hate aloud gives us the best chance of knowing which are the most radical, & evaluate which are the most likely to cause real problems, rather than just noise.

I'm sure there is no chance of banning them now, they are already too numerous. We have seen the last government accidently on purpose, stuff up their illegal boat people policy. They obviously did this to retain the Muslim vote in the western suburbs of Sydney, knowing that was their only chance of retaining those seats.

They must also have known what dreadful policy it was, & how many future problems they were importing, but they just don't care past the next election. Unless some parties change their attitude, they will be softly softly on these troublemakers indefinitely.

Hasbeen, I am afraid that by the time a political party decides that
it is a major problem it will be too late.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the Netherlands.
The party headed by Gert Wilders has become the largest party in their parliament.
I don't know much about their policies except that they intend to ban
the Koran because it is a hate publication under existing laws.

I guess now the bleating hearts will say the bible is also.
Well those paragraphs in the bible are historical and do not prescribe
current policy, whereas the Koran is not open to interpretation and
is to be taken literally.
That is why women, but not men are put to death for adultery.
Lots of comparisons like that.

This quote below comes from a Pastor friend in Kenya which I received last night.
"The government has recommended that Pastors take up arms -- firearms -- following recent assassinations of pastors near Mombasa. It is rumored that Al Shabaab is offering a $125,000 bounty on pastors' heads. The government has signed an arrangement to repatriate more than a million Somali refugees, of whom 600,000 are documented and an estimated 500,000 undocumented. The refugees have brought significant security problems for the country, but it remains to be seen whether they will be happy to return to Somalia."

Islam has no national boundaries nor do the factions of Islam. The radical factions will dominate by fear and assassination.

Gentle men it may well appear as if I am the mad hatter from Alice's journeys.
But with true thought not imagining I think we are part of an experiment.
America became a great nation in no small part because of its open arms migration plan.
We prospered greatly by our postwar door opening rush to grow.
I think at some level just as Monarchs once got together, some group thought/still thinks they can breed the differences out of us.
They got it wrong.
The Religion and its many different interpretations is the trouble.
No regard for this country,s culture by both those who give trouble and every politician who bought them, highlights we contributed to the problem.

Belly, as you know I'm not a Jesus Freaky or a Happy Clapper, I'm not even a Presbyterian, little own a Muslim. I'm am an unashamed atheist. I very much think like you, I believe the world in general would be better off without organized religions and god is no more that a figment of mans imagination to explain the unexplainable.
If it could be clearly demonstrated any organisation, including a religion, was nothing more than a front for criminals and their criminal activities then society should expect, indeed demand, action be taken against that front organisation. If a religion could be clearly shown to be purely a front for terrorism and nothing more, then the community should expect action, just as they should expect action be taken against a clearly criminal organsiation such as a bikie gang, who are all about crime and nothing about motorcycles.
Banning is not easy, in the wrong hands it is a very dangerous weapon and it has been used by many throughout history to serve their ends and not the people. Clearly there are criminals who purport to be Muslim, as there are criminals who claim Christianity as their religion, that in itself does not make the religion criminal but it doesn't excuse the individuals either.
I often accuse the Catholic Church of being a criminal organisation, not because of crimes committed by individuals within the church, and they have been numerous amongst their clergy, but because the hierarchy from the top down has extensively engaged in a wide spread cover up of crimes within, that to me makes the Catholic Church a criminal organisation. Has it reach a point where massive action should be taken against the church as a whole, probable not yet. I do however believe a thorough investigation of the Catholic Church in the poorest and most populated countries it controls would uncover church abuse on a huge scale, and then the answer could be different.

I find it a bit ironic that an add for Muslima, a Muslim matrimonial site is appearing next to this discussion,

Is Mise , give me a shock and stop playing petty games.
Yes, there are White Muslims, but how many? 1% or less?
And those come from countries like Albania and Bosnia, where other criteria (assets, IQ, literacy) would exclude most of them.

Tony Lavis , you are describing Christianity centuries ago.
Muslims are doing those nasty things *today*.
And Christians didn't “invade” Europe. They *were* Europeans. They converted.

one under god “100 years ago,..most Arabs were part of the Ottoman Empire/Caliphate “

An empire build by force, like any other.
And dominated by Turks, not Arabs.
The Arabs revolted against them, remember?

The British (and French) only ruled the Middle East for a couple of decades.
If these new borders were so unsatisfactory, the liberated Arabs could have dissolved them immediately upon independence. They didn't.

The British Empire was “multiethnic” too. The conquered peoples didn't suddenly stop being Indian or African.
Their cultures still survive today.

When the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia dissolved, they formed, you guessed it, ethnic-based nations.
That should tell us something about human nature vs ideology, hmmm?

The history of all these, and other, conflicts should tell us how stupid and dangerous mixing different peoples together can be.
Like most other cases, this will end in war.

And a really messy one, considering how many “peoples” will be involved.

The global contribution to immigration, and its pan-Western context, may even mean it escalates into a truly “world war”, as foreign nations refuse to remain neutral after seeing news reports of “their” people being attacked.

So Pakistan declares war on Britain, Turkey on Germany, Mexico on the US, etc.
Everyone fighting everyone.
The war to end all wars. Or possibly Mankind.

Is it worth risking this for a utopian fairytale, only suitable for children under 4?

Well Shockadelic, here it will probably end up with a war between the
Chinese and the Arabs. Two more different peoples I cannot imagine.

I would bet on the Chinese winning probably because China would support
the Chinese side and the Chinese do not marry their cousins so that
gives them a head start, literally ! Pun intended.

Perhaps we Anglos can sit on the sidelines and watch from New Zealand.

err I should have said;
watch from Fortress New Zealand.

Shockadelic,

Ain't playing games; I asked for a definition of 'white' not the percentage of white Muslims.

shokkers/quote..<<..Their cultures still survive today.>>

thats a matter for opinion..generally/speaking..[for the servile class]..and the serfs..the go-on..serving after the invader..much like before[according to their trendy customs]

but wehat is their culture[top down/master slave]
sure they got rituals..creed/rituals
and custom..but of who's culture

see how colonizers/invaders..come in..with
new customs..new cultures..new names..[even name changes]

like the war bride[now a widow..needs adopt the invaders last namee
and adopt the sub-standing..of now belonging TO.. a mister..[ie]..mister's..[,mr's war booty call]

change the names[hide the histry of the invasion]
get rid..or the alpha/beta[origonal]..AB-origonal..custom/culture

the kids will.be mongrels...without custom/culture
thus by being native to the area[become indigenous..;which means sans culture]

like a plant has no culture..thus is said to be indigenie
but back to the invader..which..usually only'invades/town-centers[where the elite/wealth are..[or rather were..the rich..allways have escape clauses

but the displaced elites..mostly/today..they cut and run..[jump on planes and use their duel-passport..[or refugee status]....and move to other climes..

where they got enough loot and plunder to form a new power base with their same old advisers..advising the same old leaders..with the same custom-ised..cuss*toms..

in the end what the heck..is culture
if you got it..but cant enforce it your abo..but by virtue of them having faulsifyable title..they are usually put up in gulages..tillthey get over it.///or die of invader drink

like the immigrants would have..done to the abo
in..their..last local of plunder[the rich dont got culture..
right of property nor of person

[but they got money..to buy off..interference..of invader law

Australia’s culture is derived from the European Enlightenment and the Age of Reason. That means liberty for every individual is protected by the power of the state. Liberty means freedom of speech or silence, freedom of or from assembly or association, freedom of or from any religion. It means rule of law and freedom from arbitrary penalties.

What to do about a cult that calls for suppression of liberty? A cult like Islam?

The state’s proper answer is not to ban it or discriminate against it in any way but to defend the people’s rights by cracking down ruthlessly against any attempt, by anyone, to enforce its religious prescriptions or proscriptions against anyone else. That means, for anyone not a citizen, permanent banishment to the kennel from which the offender came. For a citizen, gaol for sedition. For someone trying to enter as immigrant, about turn quick march. In fact, a condition of entry could be a pledge to respect every person’s right lawfully to reject, disobey, insult any cult or ideology within the confines of the law. Any breach of the pledge at any time thereafter to merit deportation for having lied in entry application.

Is Mise,
Ask someone to give a definition of "Aboriginal" or "Asian", everyone knows who's White and who isn't, it's only on the internet that we get asked "Who's White?", it doesn't and shouldn't happen in real life.
Judge Mordecai Bromberg in Eatock v Bolt:
"In reaching those conclusions, I have observed that in seeking to promote tolerance and protect against intolerance in a multicultural society, the Racial Discrimination Act must be taken to include in its objectives tolerance for and acceptance of racial and ethnic diversity. At the core of multiculturalism is the idea that people may identify with and express their racial or ethnic heritage free from pressure not to do so. People should be free to fully identify with their race without fear of public disdain or loss of esteem for so identifying."

Yes Jay Of Melbourne, & that is why multiculturalism is a crock of the smelly stuff, promoted by ethnics & idiots, to rip off the rest of the Oz population.

It has helped allow too much immigration by people who will not fit in with the existing population. It is the most destructive policy Oz has known.

Sure, lets ban the Muslims and let the child-molesting Christians get on with it in safety.

Religion is just a form of tribalism that provides personal justification and an excuse for personal prejudice and hate. Since there is no significant majority of belief, it's proof that at any time the majority of the human race is living some sort of irrational delusion.

It still amazes me however that some people are unable to tell the difference between religion and culture.

From my point of view it makes no difference whether it is religion or culture.
It is an ideology wrapped in a religious cloak.
It is a fascist theological government aimed at achieving a world
government known as the Caliphate.

There is no point in comparing it to other religions as it has quite
different political aims.
If you have any doubt just look at the countries where it is dominant.
Would you like Australia to be like those ?

All Australians are free to follow any religion
they choose, so long as its practices do not
break any Australian law. Australians are also
free not to folollow a religion. We have a secular
government and no official or state religion.
Governments treat all citizens as equal regardless
of religion and religious laws have no legal status
in Australia.

Banning any particular religion is against our Constitution
as David F., pointed out in an earlier post. All Australians
are equal under the law which means that nobody should be
treated differently from anybody else because of their
race, ethnicity, or country of origin, because of their age,
gender, marital status, or disability, or because of their
political or religious beliefs. Our Government agencies and
independent courts must treat everyone fairly.

Actually Foxy the constitution doesn't prohibit a state religion it prohibits the state from establishing any religion in it's own right, Parliament is not a secular institution and neither is the government, ministers are sworn in via sacred oath or an affirmation in the name of the law, according to their conscience or beliefs.
It's a secular state in the same sense that "atheism" is a faith that there's no divine presence, if you take my meaning, call it "non dogmatic religious faith"....except that from certain points of view it is dogmatic, but that's another topic.

Dear Jay of Melbourne,

You should read my post before you reply to it.
Kindly do so.

And while you're at it look up Section 116 - of the
Constitution of Australia - which clearly states
against the prohibiting of the free exercise of
any religion - which is the point that David
F., made on page 1 of this thread - and it's also
the point that I was making.

Foxy, every thing you say is correct, but so what has that got to do with the problem ?

its easy..to ban religion..just change..its name*
[but recall..we will..*KNOW..them..by their works

zionism..is a jewish..form..of athiesm
http://www.nkusa.org/AboutUs/Zionism/greatgulf.cfm

One means of misleading many Jews..and all too many non-Jews is the Zionist misuse of names..and symbols..*sacred in Judaism.

They use the holy name Israel for their Zionist state. They have named their land acquisition fund with a term that traditionally implies the reward for piety,..good deeds, and charitable work.

They have adopted..as a state symbol..the menorah.(candlebrum).

*What hypocrisy,..*..what perversion*..it is
to have the Israeli army*..*fight under an emblem,
the meaning..of which is..explained in the Tenach (on the occasion of a previous return..to the Holy Land) as,

*"not with armed force.and not w..*ith power,
but..*in My spirit..*says the Lord of Hosts."

The infamous founder of political Zionism, may his name be cursed, who only discovered his own Jewishness because of anti-Semitism displayed at the Dreyfus trial in France, proposed various solutions to what he called the "Jewish problem."

At one point he proposed to resettle the Jews in Uganda. At another he proposed to convert them to Catholicism. He finally hit on the idea of a Judenstaat, an exclusive Jewish state.

Thus from its very beginning Zionism was a result of Anti-Semitism and indeed is completely compatible with it, because Zionists and anti-Semites had (and have) a common goal: To bring all Jews from their places of domicile to the Zionist state, thus uprooting Jewish communities that had existed for hundreds and even thousands of years.
.
Loyalty to the Zionist state was substituted for loyalty to G-d, and the state was made into the modern "golden calf". Belief in the Torah and fulfillment of religious obligations in Zionist eyes became a private matter and not a duty for every Jew or for the Jewish people. The Zionists made divine law subject to party or parliamentary votes, and they set their own standards of conduct and ethics.

Neither*..the founder of political Zionism nor..any of the prime ministers..of the Zionist state..*believed in..the divine origin of the Torah..*nor even in the existence of G-d.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=not+all+jews+are+zionist.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15664&page=0
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15618&page=0

Dear Bazz,

The point being made by David and myself is that it is
against our Constitution to ban any religion and banning
the Muslim religion is what is being suggested by this
thread.

The religious symbol of the swastika that was used by religions and even by Boy Scouts was hijacked by Nazis to become a hated symbol of murder and oppression. It conveys such offence and public opprobrium that its display can result in arrest. In effect, the symbol is banned.

It is astounding that certain dress such as the burka that is representative of oppression, cruelty, enslavement and death is defended in western democratic countries. It would be ridiculous to assert that Section 116 of the Constitution could protect the burqa and more than it would defend the swastika.

As a reminder, the founding fathers lived at a time of persecution of peaceful religious minorities in Europe. They sought to maintain freedom through rights, but no way would they have countenanced religions or cultures -call them what you may- that trampled over people's rights and caused harm, or warping of people's rights, especially to freedom of speech.

In the eyes of the founding fathers too, there was no incongruity or difficulty in having the occupant of the highest position in the land as head of the church as well as of the Parliament and military forces. That was necessary integration and defended from forces from without.

I am generally opposed to bans, however I am not convinced that any restriction of certain religious or ethnic practices such as wearing the burka in public for instance would constitute discrimination against a particular group. Definitely it would not be contrary to the Aussie Constitution.

It is interesting though to find posters who would put up the Constitution, existing laws and tradition as defences whereas elsewhere they are trenchant critics, opining that we must 'move with change', where it suits them. Must be that 'It is always OK if it suits me, so butt out and never you mind' thinking that is about.

otb..<<..i am generally opposed to bans, however I am not convinced that any restriction of certain religious or ethnic practices such as wearing the burka in public for instance would constitute discrimination against a particular group>>

yeaH
PLUS NUNS HABBITS TOO
AND BABY BONNETS

AND WOMAN WEARING SCARVES OR LONG SKIRTS//OR..JEANS
AND WHATS WITH BRAS..NO..THEIR GONE I TELL YA

AND WHATS WITH ALLOWING THEM TO..SHAVE
YEAH..thats..VERBOTTEN..TOO

WHAT YA THINK WERE PURITANS OF SUM THIN

ohhh lord..such a mindf..and..he wastes it..
thinking about getting back..at women..

what..too many women..been blowing up..in your neck of the woods..beach ball?

At a party this arvo with some Muslim people in attendance. Religion didn't stop the girls and a couple of the boys from having a fun time with the karaoke. Muslim's sing 'Proud Mary' just like the rest of us...terrible.
If you're feeling a bit low the this might help.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRG9qntd4g4

only short but the words have great message of welcome to all.

Is Mise "I asked for a definition of 'white' not the percentage of white Muslims."

You asked a definition "in the context of my post" which is about Islam/immigration.
Others have played this game before you.
I define "White", then they say "Oh, but aren't Albanians White? They're Muslim."

I just jumped ahead of you.

My definition of "White" doesn't change depending on the "context".
It means People Of European Ethnic Descent.

Very few such people are Muslims and very few Muslims are such people.
A "racial" limitation would therefore restrict Muslims to infinitesimal numbers, without any explicit religious prohibition.

It would have the added benefit of encouraging immigration of people from similar/related "very high development" countries, within the same civilisation.
A far more sensible policy than everything-and-anything-all-at-once-in-huge-numbers.

Bazz, I wish we could just sit on the sidelines.
It won't be that easy.

Rather than risk another thread, one that may well be rejected because of its substance, here I go.
Out side a Sydney court house a Muslim man released on bail.
He had just been set free on bail while waiting for his appeal.
He had been found guilty and sentenced to six months, the Magistrate was disdainful of his actions and behavior, during *the Muslim Sydney riot*
Know many will challenge my use of that term, but try to name the Cronulla Riot an Australian one, ignoring years of *FILTH AND INSULTS TO WOMEN THERE*
Too the claims Muslims owned that beach.
But back to the Gentleman telling the cameras he is a good man who never has done anything wrong.
Here it is vital to know Muslims learn from their holly book it is ok to lie to us.
The bloke wearing what looked like a dress and head covering , stood out.
DARE I? if the beggar was Australian and the clothing black?
I would be free to talk of hoodys and tell of what looked like a criminal.

Belly, if the bloke is on appeal of a 6 month sentence, should he not be out on bail until his appeal is determined? Otherwise he would do the 6 months and then on appeal could be "found to not have done the crime but still done the time." Plenty of time to lock him up for 6 months later, the jails not going to go away any time soon. If deemed to be a threat to society then put a few conditions on him, I'm sure the magistrate did, like reporting to police etc.

belly..youmust stop gewtting your info fromnewspapers

these days..you..can ask direct..
get the true..answer from..the horse/mouth
[not..the media's/butt]

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=the+bible+says+we+can+lie

http://www.mesora.org/Deception.htm

Why does our Holy Torah contain so many instances of deception? After being a student of the Chumash for many years, I am left with a feeling of misunderstanding.

Whenever I conclude a Parsha that illustrates deception performed by our Patriarchs, I cannot arrive at a positive explanation for its inclusion.

I feel that all..that these illuminations of deception do, is provide the Gentiles..with more ammunition to criticize the Jewish people.

http://www.google.com.au/search?q=the+quran+says+we++can+lie

Position of Islam Regarding Lies And Liars
According to Quran & Sunnah
http://www.islamtomorrow.com/lies.asp

Allah Almighty tells about the source of lying inside the brain of humans, fourteen hundred years ago. Allah tells us how He will deal with the liars, the lying sinful liars, in surah Al Alaq. (chpater 96).

"Allah will grab him by the (naseyah) [frontal lobe of the brain], the lying sinful (naseyah).

How could anyone have imagined 1,400 years ago, the frontal lobe of the brain was the source of lying, agression and transgression? Yet, this is decribed in Quran as the exact location inside of the human mind for these horrible characteristics.

We can say, without doubt that, lying is one of the most evil characteristics, of which all religions and systems of ethics warn against and which man's innate common sense (Fitrah) agrees that it is wrong. Any who possess normal chivalry and sound reason would be obliged to same the same.

Truthfulness is one of the pillars on which the moral survival of the world depends. It is the foundation of praiseworthy characteristic

Well at least Foxy has pointed out the nub of the problem.
It is the constitution, it was never envisaged that a religion would
have as its central purpose the overthrow of the government and
constitution in the name of God, err Allah, and impose a religious
theocratic dictatorship.

Unfortunately that is the aim of Islam and they are so sure of themselves
that they proclaim it.
So where does that leave us ?
It would be necessary to get a court order proclaiming that Islam is
a political movement guilty of sedition.

Sedition Oxfird dictionary:- conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch.

In view of declaration of Immans that they do not recognise the
authority of the courts but only Allah it would seem that could be
a basis for banning. ie they refuse to accept the authority of the
majority.

This where it gets difficult as they will declare that they accept
the legal authority, but the Koran says it is acceptable to lie to
kafirs if the purpose is to support Islam.

the constitution..is a con-cept..[its hooked into the magna carta
but quote any of them to a cop..[or a court]..they dont GET..their power from them

they get it[their authority]....from an act[written writing..*by an author's hand.

this written PER-mission..sets up a contractual/authority..includes but not exceeds..the authority..of the living auther]

anyhow there are acts..of men..[authorities]
and presents from..god..[omni-presence][we each stand under god alone

it seems we are..entertaining..concepts..[ideas]
just..so..today's edit..includes the power..of shared ideas
and why we seem so driven..to get others to share our own..ideas

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040#176278

you must remember..someone..FIRST*..*gave you.your ideas.
then you gave them..life..[powers over]..your living/thought/works[powers]

but how trust-worthy..was the source..?
if the source..has..expressed lie/fear..only fear can come out

if it divides..judges..is left to..the mere whim..of mere man?
[its..not..of the will..of god..if its not ALL good..for all..

a great idea..makes joy..and only gets better..more valuable..by sharing.]

edited extract..[of..*jesus..latest..words]..talking..of his mindset
http://miraclevision.com/acim/urtext/acim-urtext-2003-upe-ready-edition.pdf
[re bill]

"..*His Mind
is..partly..YOURS..and also..*PARTLY..GOD’S.

This..needs clarification/not*..merely..in re-statement,
since..what..we have said..that..this before,..is..but..that wrought..by..life-EXPERIENCE...of..the conception..of a higher idea*

The..Holy-Spirit..is..simply..a will..[as you will]
calling..for..the *IDEA..[of healing...by..Being]..of thought,
of..*the..life..of..*the...idea..as it GAINS..ever more..living power..AS IT..*IS..SHARED.

by...Being..the call..FOR that..GOOD..of..God,
it..is also..the idea..OF God's good..fair/just..rewards.

*you are..ape-part..of God,..it is*also..the idea..your will envisions..of..the embodied-being/of..YOURSELF..being,..appart..as much a a part..as well..as of*..all the parts..of Good.[god]

The idea..of..the Holy Spirit/shares..the property[proper-ties]..properties....[pro-portions]..of other ideas,..because it follows*..upon..beyond..the laws..even..of the universe..of which IT
is..a part.[ape-heart]

Therefore,..it is strengthened*..by being..given*away.
It increases..in YOU..as you/give it..to your brothers.[for/free]

Since..thoughts*..*do not..have to be..*conscious..to exist,
your brother..does not..evem..have to/be AWARE..of/the Holy Spirit,[..either in himself..or in you]..for this..miracle..to occur.

He may/have..dissociated..the call/for Good,
just/as..YOU have...But the..dissociation..[misscreation].is healed in
BOTH/of..you..*as you*see_it*..in him,..and thus..acknowledge..its BEING.

Bill,..who/has..made..a number..of vital/contributions..to our
joint-venture,..made a..major-one..a while ago,..one..by..which
he..himself..did/not..notice/appreciate..or even understand.

If..*we recognize..its value together,..we/will..will to/be..en-able to..use it..together,..*because it is*..an idea,..and..*must therefore..be shared..to be/held...respected/reverently/reflectively/activly..used*.

When/Bill..said that..he..*was determined*
“NOT to see..you..that way,”..[he was speaking/negatively.]

If..he will..but..re-state..the same idea,,but..POSITIVELY,
as affirmation..he will..see the POWER..of what he/said.

He..*had realized.that there..*are..*two_ways..of seeing
you,..and..also that..*they..so seeing..are/diametrically..opposed to one/an-other.

These two ways..must be*..miss-realized..in HIS mind,..because he
was*..referring/to..HIMSELF..as/the..*per-ceiver.
They..*must also..be in YOURS,.because..what,..he was/perceiving..was YOU.

What..he was..*really saying..was..that/he
would*NOT..look at you..*through HIS ego,..nor..perceive*YOUR ego..in you.

Stated positively,..that..he would*..[will/to[..see you
through*..the Holy/Spirit..*in..HIS mind,..and perceive..*it..in YOURS.

What you acknowledge..in..your brother,..*you ARE
acknowledging.,.*in yourself...What you share *..you STRENGTHEN.

The voice..of..the Holy/Spirit..IS weakly..willed..in you..yet.
That..is why..you MUST*..share it,..*because..*it must be..INCREASED in/strength..*before YOU..can..will..to/hear it.

It is impossible..to hear it..in yourself..while it..is
indeterminate..[unfocused/unfiltered]..so weak..yet..in your OWN mind.

It is..*NOT weak..in itself;..but it IS..
limited/by..your..very/un-willingness to/hear it.

Will itself..is an idea,..and is therefore..only..strengthened by being shared...You have made/the mistake..of looking..*for the Holy Spirit..ONLY..*in YOURSELVES,..and that/is why..your meditations
have/frightened..you.

By..adopting..the ego’s..viewpoint,
you undertook..an..ego-alien..journey..of ,mal-creations..but fear not..

only your..own fears..keeps them..alive.
[recall..ye/not..ye..shalt..NOT*..FEAR..no*evil*].

The government shouldn't leave the door open for the High Court to determine policy, which is what that court does when it decides how it will read a piece of legislation, and what precedents to follow.

As well, the government really must do something about the federal Racial Discrimination Act 1975. It is another case where a court has been able to determine policy by variously reading a law in the broad and narrowly at the same time.

However at its root, the problem is that federal governments have created a mill stone around their own neck by the extreme multiculturalism chosen for Australia - policy that the electorate was never consulted on and never allowed to vote on- and the powerful ethnic lobby is funded from taxpayers' money. The ethnic tail wags the public dog every time.

The population mix changed dramatically after World
War II when Australia increased its migrant intake
considerably and broadened the range of countries from
which the immigrants were allowed to come.

Until the early 1970s, assimilation and the preservation of
"White Australia" continued as the Australian Government's
official policies. Migrants of every ethnic origin were
expected to assimilate promptly into a monocultural
mould of Australian identity, based on the Anglo-Saxon/
Celtic culture.

The ideal migrant was one who assimilated easily, who
became more similar to the host population as a result of
social interaction and through the shedding of attributes
of their culture.

In the meantime, the postwar diversification
in Australian immigrants' backgrounds continued,
multiculturalism was becoming more and more evident in all
walks of life.

The new face of Australia was in existence, long before the
politicians and civil leaders were prepared to admit it.
The very presence of foreign languages and foreign language
press in Australia mirrored the nation's growing cultural
diversity.

Several other factors combined to erode, and finally eliminate
in 1966, the White Australia and Government-promoted
assimilation policies. The contributing factors included
generally changing social attitudes, war service, travel,
foreign students in Australia.

The revised immigration policy allowed new people to come and
settle in Australia. People from a wide range of nationalities,
races, religions and cultures. By the end of the 1970s,
Australia had acquired an unmistakably new heterogeneous face.

The official Government policies reflected these social
developments. They moved from "assimilation" to "integration,"
and then to "multiculturalism."

The Galbally Report (1978) was the turning point. It urged
the Australian Government "to encourage" the retention of the
cultural heritage of different ethnic groups and promote
intercultural understanding.

Since then, the Australian Government has re-defined
"multiculturalism."
"Multiculturalism involves living together
with an awareness of cultural diversity."

At present, Australia is one of the most ethnically diverse
societies in the world. However, the concept of multiculturalism
continues to have different meanings to different people.

Some Australians still believe that a
"unique Australian society and identity emerged with Federation
and this identity should be the basis of immigrant assimilation."

a good sound theses..lexie..
i would add..that there was a sudden change[amoung the poor]
that had a huge role in..ozzz societal..change..[that was when govt paid kids to go to..school]

allof a sudden..the standards of education fell
the now monmeyed up kids..bought upbig..onallthat nice new consuming age

bought walkmans..records cds cassette tapes clothing.,.maccas and other junk food..simply cause govt wanted consumers..and the best thing was to set up the junk shops so the kids could spend spend,,spend too much get credit cards and spent ya super

they now are so..over loaded with..easy money..the hex
they..need stronger than bex..sure they..can spend..but for how long must our super depend on..the kids overspend

i.recall too a biggie,..was when woman began working
overnight..houses needed duel..incomes..two working..while govt holds ransom ya kids..programing their minds into..landless consumerist..debt assuming..peons..

working for a modern..man
the two passport [duel..passport] holding land-lord and foreign/master

or something..like that..

Foxy,

Off again on a rant and throwing in the 'White Australia' card as well.

Do you really have to continually recycle your old posts from years ago? When you most likely didn't attribute a source then either.

Posted by Lexi, Wednesday, 22 June 2011 1:31:42 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12221&page=2

Talk about being stuck in a rut. Or does that 'research' or 'library' job of yours pay you to do that?

Taxpayers will be overjoyed when the federal government stops wasting $millions annually on the victim industries set up by Whitlam. Any wonder ambulances are ramped outside hospital emergency units - no guesses where the money is being diverted instead.

onthebeach, I found part of Foxy's comment repeated in a post from 2009!
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2827#64264

I know these threads tend to get repetitive, but one would think people could at least write a new sentence, not just cut and paste their old ones.

And what is the point of your rant anyway, Foxy?

I think Australians had developed a self-identity *before* Federation.
That's one reason it happened.
When was the last time you heard anyone refer to themselves as a "New South Welshmen"?

"The Galbally Report (1978) was the turning point. It urged
the Australian Government "to encourage" the retention of the
cultural heritage of different ethnic groups"

Why should the government "encourage" any cultural practices?
Not interfere, yes. Encourage, no.

otb,

You need to understand that we need to look
into Australia's past to find out how our
national image and identity came about and
to see if the image changes or not, and why.

As I stated earlier the concept of multiculturalism
continues to have different meanings for different
people.
Hidden anti-mirgant prejudices may not be voiced in
public until they are highlighted by some well-publicized
incident, such as Pauline Hanson's maiden speech in
Australian Parliament.

And I fully understand that some Australians, such as
yourself, still believe that "a unique Australian
society and identity emerged with Federation and that
this identity should be the basis of immigrant
assimilation." Some politicians share your belief.

You brought up the issue of multiculturalism on this
thread. I felt obliged however to clarify some of the
assumptions you made about it and set the historical
record straight. It's archival material and is
available from any public library in this country if
you care to do a bit of research yourself.
I'd highly recommend it to you. You just may actually
learn something from the experience.
But, a closed mind is like a closed book.
Just a piece of wood.

Dear SPQR,

I merely respond to people's posts especially
when they blurp out things that aren't accurate.
It wasn't me who brought up the topic of
multiculturalism in this thread. I simply felt
obliged to respond. The historical information
does not change - therefore it is perfectly
acceptable to cite it again.

Foxy, you have confused the discussion again.
The argument is not about race at all.
Nor is it about multiculturalism.

It is about a religious/political organisation.
We have banned a number of organisations that are associated with the
said religious/political organisation and indeed they claim their
activities are in defence and support of that organisation.
That religious/political often publically supports those banned groups.
When it suits, some part of that of that religious/political organisation
will deny their banned groups.
That is allowed in their political manual if it helps the cause.
That is the challenge they have presented us.

I do find this discussion interesting, particularly in who holds what opinion.

It is amusing that the ladies, who are to be burka wearing chattels, once Sharia law is introduced, who are defending our Islamic boat people invasion.

It is the men, who have everything to gain, [if having 3 wives could be considered a good thing], who are against the whole idea.

I think I could go for the idea of 72 virgins waiting for me in heaven. Of course, never having met an adult one of that rare species, I'm not quite sure I would actually like them.

Dear Bazz,

I merely responded to otb's comment regarding
multiculturalism. I felt obliged to correct
his version of it. So Thanks for your concern
and I shall try to stay on topic next time.

Dear Hasbeen,

My husband says to tell you that you're missing a great deal
in never having known a virgin.

"I could go for the idea of 72 virgins waiting for me" The virgins were expecting nothing less than Mr Bean. but to their eternal disappointment that got Mr Hasbeen. the crying and wailing still hasn't stopped.

ohh dear..3..wives..4 times the misery
anyhow..re the virgin..issue..recall the fish..even john west rejects?

but thats just being mean..but old firgins..
clearly know naught..of the way..of love..but then neither murders of man/..know less..of love..and need to explain..to the life giver..why they took others life

anyhow the virgin,,thing is myth..and delusion
but then again..killers arnt that sane

ok sunshine..here are your 70,,porkers
all..virginal./.all truly female..all cruelly pigs..

[swine-hund]..

Paul it is as I have said sentenced to 6 months and entered a wish to appeal, then and walked out of court free.
Nothing wrong with that surely? it is standard practice.
Dressed in his head to tow dress and head covered,your mate [who had refused to stand for the magistrate] told us he was a great bloke and had never done anything wrong.
Question for you Paul.
Has any single Muslim ever done anything wrong in your view?
In time we all of this world, will know some within the Muslim community are a threat to world peace and too stand firmly in the way of us being one people world wide hate Paul, needs confronting not your feeble cuddling.
Truth no matter how unpleasant is the only measure we have

Belly, You know full well I do not support any organised religion Islam, Catholic any religion at all. If organised religion was to disappear from the face of the earth tomorrow, I would say good riddance to bad rubbish.
However, and its a big however, I don't agree with those who want to take a single case, or an isolated case and extrapolate that to cover, in general, all who they can associate with that single or isolated case, with the use of religion. There is no doubt that some Muslims in the world are "bad", but I do not believe there is evidence that intrinsically all Muslims are "bad" no more so than all Catholics are "bad".
You ask; "Has any single Muslim ever done anything wrong in your view?" Ah! yes, they blew up some building in the US.
You could have asked, "Has any single blue eyed person ever done anything wrong in your view? Ah! yes, killed a lot of people at Port Arthur. What is your point from this? Ban ALL Muslims, ban ALL blue eyed people? I no more walk down the street, and as I pass a man in traditional Islamic dress, think is he another Osama Bin Laden, no more than as I pass a blue eyed white male and think is he another Martin Bryant. There are some who want you to think that way, totally irrational thinking.
As for the bloke with the 6 months, at the end of the day if guilty, give him an extra 6 moths for being a time waster, kick him out, I don't care, but in the mean time let him have his day in court.

Sorry Paul you are a white wash expert and blind to reason.
This grub I speak of refused to stand in court he thinks Australian courts do not deserve his respect.
His actions during the riot are the acts of true filth.
You must understand if you name folk racist but refuse to see the criminality of this bloke you under mine every thing you say.
HOWEVER if all religions did not exist mankind would be at peace and one.

Don't be obtuse Paul.
You know that what we are talking about is fundamentally different.
If religion worries you, forget that aspect and concentrate on the
political side of it.

Would you approve of the National Socialist Party being set up here ?
Well the only difference to what we are discussing is they do not have
a belief in Aryan superiority.

This lot believe in their religious and political superiority.
Their Immans wear beards and not moustaches.

I will vote to ban religion when athiest stop telling lies. Religion is safe especially when you roll with laughter at the pathetic lot of lies evolutionist tell.

Bazz asked "Would you approve of the National Socialist (Workers) Party, get it right, being set up here?" Yes, but I'm not about to join. At one time in the 1930's we had such a party in Australia, it was called The New Guard, as I pointed out just today on another thread a group much admired by the founder of The Liberal Party Pig Iron Bob Menzies. If the founder of The Liberal Party admired fascism why shouldn't you. We still have a number of extreme right wing parties in Australia, people who preach a hate message against minorities of all kinds. Look up Jim Saleam.

Foxy.."Since then, the Australian Government has re-defined
"multiculturalism."
"Multiculturalism involves living together
with an awareness of cultural diversity."

Define living together Foxy?

Does this mean a Muslim or a black father will allow
his daughter to marry a non-muslim. Truly living
together as one people normally do.

Or does it mean living divided? more like sharing the wealth
and land living together, but not living together as intimates
in marriage, family and homes or indeed even the the same suburbs
as people who are really accepting and willing to share intimacy
and living together would do.

If there are barriers, then the second definition is not really
living together on the human level is it? When groups
are told they must accept these cultural barriers as to why
people refuse to really live together because it's their culture
or religion to not do so, then this promotes divided living together.

Like... them over there and us over here. Real acceptance of
other cultures and people means really living together, not
just playing some game that enforces division with the use
of twisted logic, that says we should be free to live in our divided
group because of our culture and religion which has no intention
of every living together with the other group as families do.
You shall never be permitted to live with us on that level.

If your definition of living together is the second one above,
then it is a very divided, shallow kind of living together and
frankly bigoted and racist.

the two state solution
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15619

i..still favor the city-sized/state..micro states
under some duel body[mens womens]..of the un

2 levels of govt..many safe refuges for refugees
never able to be exiled more than..a city apart[globaly]

or states centered around our educational zones
a state/council services run from schools
school run by mens/womans boards

i figure..if you can afford to live anywhere
you got the right to be welcome..there

lets see beyond race sex/states..big govt..endless destraction
if you can pay stay..if you cant..the police take you all the way home

schools run..local council..zones

@ CHERFUL, Tuesday, 19 November 2013 1:05:51 PM

Good post.

Afraid I must stand against a friend here and say great post CHEERFUL.
See no matter how much we try to hide it the truth is many, far too big a number to ignore, from within this faith do not want inclusiveness.
They do however want our social security system, and every thing they can bleed out of it.
Untrue? no way!
Some here for more than a decade are still leeching on it! NUMBERS PLEASE MR ABBOTT!

Dear CHERFUL,

I was merely giving a historical account taken
from historical government records as to what the
Australian government policies were of the past
regarding migrants and how every ethnic origin
were expected to assimilate promptly into a
monocultural mould of Australian identity based on
the the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic culture.

As I stated in my earlier post the ideal
immigrant was the one who assimilated easily, one who
became more similar to the host population as a
result of social interaction and through the shedding of
attributes of their culture.

However, in time, revised immigration policy reflected
social developments in Australia and the official
Government policies moved from "assimilation" to
"integration," and then, to "multiculturalism."

It was the Galbally Report in 1978 that was the turning point
when it urged the Australian Government to "encourage the
retention of the cultural heritage of different ethnic
groups and promote intercultural understanding."

Since than, the Australian Government has re-defined
"multiculturalism" several times.

One simple definition states, "Multiculturalism involves
living together with an awareness of cultural diversity."

The keyword here is "an awareness." But of course as I also
stated the concept of multiculturalism continues to have
different meanings for different people.

Australia today is a gathering of many cultures and this
is one of the most unique and rewarding aspects of living
in Australia. The nature of being Australian is to be
part of this diversity. The wide and varied gathering of
"identities" is in keeping with the sense of potential
and openess so many people enjoyed on coming here.

As I've stated in the past many times, I feel privileged
to have been born here and to have been ablt to make
a home here and also to have found my own sense of
belonging.

cont'd ...

Dear CHERFUL,

I shall try to answer your question as to
what a Muslim or black or white father, would or
would not do in the case of allowing his daughter/son
to marry (or not) someone outside their culture?

That I guess would depend on their individual
decisions and thinking. I can't make assumptions
about what other people would or would not do.
And yes, some would probably opt for being divisive,
be they Muslim, Catholic, Jew, or Anglican. Black
or White. Many would prefer to maintain their own
cultures - strictly speaking.

However, in my own family - we have inter-marriage
with various cultures. Which I thin is more
the norm in this country, and has been for
generations now. We have a vast family of
English, Scottish, Chinese, German, Russian, and
Lithuanian relatives. As I imagine that many
Australian families follow suit. We're proud of that
mix and we happily live and share together. It makes
life interesting. Our children and grand-children
speak several languages.

I hope that answers your question.

Repeating yourself again, Foxy?

If you tell a lie enough times it becomes the truth?
Separate means "together".
Incongruity is harmony.

"the ideal immigrant was the one who assimilated easily"

Yes, because every culture is a self-defined entity.
(And we're Australian, not Anglo-Saxon/Celtic, whatever that is.)

Japan is Japan because it's Japanese, it's not everything.

Mexico is Mexico because it's Mexican, not anything at all.

If you move to Japan or Mexico, adapting to *its* nature would be "ideal".
Expecting Japan or Mexico to adapt to *you*, the alien outsider, is ridiculous!

"who became more similar to the host population as a result of social interaction and through the shedding of attributes of their culture."

No, under White Australia policy, we chose people who were *already* similar to us, making the adjustment for both sides easier and quicker.

Societies need commonalities, traditions, norms or people cannot "live together".
People cannot function in an anarchic, meaningless void.

You can question and criticise norms, but that just results in *new* norms, not no norms.

We already shared much with other Europeans, but little with non-Europeans. (There are logical, historical reasons for this).

There may not be anything technically "wrong" with the commonalities, traditions, norms of unrelated cultures.
They make perfect sense and are appropriate for *those* contexts.

But they're not living in that context anymore.

We can *choose* to incorporate alien cultural forms (we happily adopted surfing) but that is up to "us" not "them".

Analogy time (all Progressives, turn brain on and try hard).

Multiculturalism is like Ultimate Sports Team Theory.

Take the world's best swimmer, best tennis player, best cricketer, best soccer player, best runner, best skier, best performer in every sport.

You must therefore have the World's Best Sports Team and will win everything and never lose!

Dear Shockadelic,

All I can do is politely suggest you go back and
re-read my posts on this issue.
You seem to have a problem understanding what I
wrote. However, that unfortunately is not something
I can do anything about except to suggest that you
take a deep breath, chill out, and quietly read what
has been stated- and try not to put your own assumptions
onto what you think - but what I actually did write.

Whoops! Mansion should read Manson--Charlie will not be happy.
http://tinyurl.com/lukjeaz

If religion is banned, it will go underground. Look at Russia.

Further, if Islam is banned, not only will it go underground, but some who were moderate, may engage with fundamentalism. This would be the possible outcome for many religions, not just Islam.

People who were just "so, so" about their faith, could well feel (with any opposition to its practice), the need to make a stand. I think this psychology would occur with many issues, not just religion, in society.

Cheerful,

Your point is taken about Muslim or black fathers not permitting their daughters to marry "out".

But this attitude is not particular to Muslims or blacks. Indeed, marrying another is often fraught by many parental caveats ... not only racial or religious, but class, political beliefs, nationality and income ... The list goes on ... interminably so, it would seem by complaints by some of marriageable age.

Certainly we Aussies have our fair share of prejudices re marriage between different races, colours, even nationalities.

Happily, many people do not subscribe to parental "orders" ... And we see increasingly inter-racial marriages, and other "inters" between couples.

No need to reread your comments, Foxy.
I'll just wait until you copy and paste them into another thread.

Remember, Fragmentation Is Solidarity!

I believe totally folk using Australians great history of migrant intake and multi cultors to compare it in any way.
With Muslim migration are having a lend of us all.
Time and again we see the very successful post war migration used to back up the Muslim separatism and contempt many have for us.
Muslim migration past and present is a self inflicted wound we will pay for.
Muslims have no intention of integration.

Danielle, you are right of course, but I think there may be other techniques.
In Holland there is a proposal to ban the Koran because it contravenes
a number of laws on religious vilification and advocating criminal activity.

The alternative is to allow Australia to get like Paris with district
"stans" being implemented with Police no go areas.
In Paris they block streets at prayer time.
Seems a bit much but in case you think that is over the top, well
it happens here in Sydney already.

What do you suggest we do ?

Dear Shockadelic,

Whatever rocks your boat Sir.

However I don't agree with your statement that
"fragmentation is solidarity."

I prefer the following summation:

"Being uprooted from your own culture, provided you
take with you the way of thinking and being that
characterises the more integrated social culture from
which you come, it is not as disruptive to happiness
and well being as becoming part of a relatively
fragmented culture."
(Iain McGilchrist).

Or put another way - "if we become divided from
society and from each other, we become fractured
and fragmented."

Hey foxy my sweet, have you found any good designs for a burqa yet? Do you think they will come in anything but black?

I don't think we have to worry too much, the government is sure to declare open season on these people sooner or later. Provided they do it before we are outnumbered more than 3 to 1, I'm sure we will have little trouble prevailing.

Don't worry Hasbeen, the Chinese will take them on before we do.
There is a population race between the Chinese and Moslems.
We will be able to have an artillery duel between Chatswood/Hurstville and Bankstown/Lakemba.

I think I know who I would bet on !

the only inevitable=war
Report from Iron Mountain unveils a hitherto top-secret report of a government commission that was requested to explore the consequences of lasting peace on American society.

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/reportironmountain1.shtml

The shocking results of the study, as revealed in this report, led the government to conceal the existence of the commission--they had found that, among other things, peace may never be possible;

*that even if it were, it would probably be un-desirable, that "defending the national interest" is not the real purpose of war;
*that war is necessary;
that war deaths should be planned and budgeted.

REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN tells the story of how the project was formed, how it operated, What happened to it.

It includes the complete verbatim text
of the commission's hitherto classified report.

so will..it be dis-info..or exposure/closure
or coded..info ..who..i knows only you could decide
being talked of here/now

http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/shoutcast/shoutcast.html

Dear Hasbeen,

Burquas are not my thing. If going for the exotic
I would prefer a Sari, Kimono, or Chinese Tunic over
leggings. But for everyday wear I tend to stick to
trouser-suits or jeans. I have friends and family who
travel and they often bring back for me the traditional
costumes of some of the countries they visit. I have
a lovely collection from India, Japan, Vietnam, and
China. So I am lucky.

As for what the government will or won't do about migrants
living in this country? I think that as we continue to
evolve as a nation new ideas will replace the old ones.
Times continue to change.

Be careful of that there foreign stuff Foxy, it can have some unexpected consequences.

More than a few years back, a friend brought back from Japan, a pair of short dark green kimonos for me. they were very comfortable for sitting around on the boat at night.

Unfortunately, living on the boat meant I did my bulky washing at a Laundromat at Cammeray. Yep, you've guessed it, the things were not colorfast. All my sheets, towels, underwear, & even lighter coloured socks turned a lovely shade of pastel green. Thank god I washed my business shirts by hand.

The sheets I did not mind, they generated some interesting evenings, but the underwear had to go. Washing my pastel green jocks at a Cammeray Laundromat, in the early 70s, attracted quite the wrong type of romantic advances for me.

Bazz if your forecast comes to pass I know who I'd have my money on. The Chinese have proved themselves to be pretty tough customers in the last 50 years, where Muslims are really only effective against noncombatants, women & children.

Still if they find a way to make suicide bombing an effective weapon of war, they might become dangerous, even when not behind you.

>>I don't think we have to worry too much, the government is sure to declare open season on these people sooner or later.<<

Of course not: a government which decrees that it is okay to hunt people for sport is obviously not the sort of government we should be worried about.

Obviously we should be very worried about the sort of government which says it isn't okay to hunt for people for sport: who knows what madcap ideas such a radical government could come up with? Next thing they'll be telling us that torture is wrong... and once you start on that slippery slope you can kiss goodbye to your freedom to rape, loot and pillage.

>>Makes me feel a lot more sympathetic for what the Germans had to put up with<<

An appallingly offensive comment. Note how GrahamY comes out swinging against such remarks (and rightly so; it was beyond the pale):

>>It's no wonder that the Jewish community is so sensitive to criticism when people like Ozzie feel they can say what he has just said. I've tossed-up whether to delete it or not, and have decided to leave it there. It demonstrates just how despicable people in this ostensibly civilised country can be<<

But strangely enough doesn't seem to care about people suggesting that is ethically acceptable to HUNT Islamic worshiping PEOPLE for SPORT.

What's up with that? Why is an anti-Semitic comment which references the Shoah more offensive than a direct incitement to violence against Muslims?

Cheers,

Tony

Careful there Tony Lavis, I think that horse might be too high for you. When you fall off, you will do yourself an injury.

Dear Tony Lavis,

Some people haven't caught up with the times
they still live in the past - and they don't
realise that the gradual ingrained attitudes
of sexism, racism, religious intolerance and
xenophobia have all been challenged and that
today laws and education have combined
to erode prejudices for most people.

The Muslims I know are middle-class and educated. They want the same things for their children as others in society. They certainly don't want their children to be radicals, extremists or suicide-bombers.

Even those met, who haven't had middle-class advantages, have aspirations for their children, and don't want them to follow fundamentalism.

Unfortunately, extremists get all the attention; one could say they seek it. I suppose most extremists, whatever religion (or any other belief) are outside normal society, indeed often antagonistic to it.

I dislike the burkha - intensely so. It predates Islam, thus a fossil, and is not a religious garment, although people would argue otherwise. In a couple of Muslim states, the burkha is banned.

Extremist religious leaders have likened a woman's face to her vagina. Less extremists have intoned various reasons for the need for this garment, the most common one, for modesty. It appears that the male gaze is irresistible to the female, who has no willpower to resist it. Whatever the reason, the burkha is a tool of oppression, making a statement about females in a particularly unpleasant way. To me, the wearing of the burkha is akin to the yellow star on Jews.

>>Still if they find a way to make suicide bombing an effective weapon of war<<

There has already been a trial of this tactic - the 'divine wind'. I don't know how effective it was but I'd love to see some reliable statistics to satisfy my curiosity. I do know the Japs lost the war, but I'm pretty sure it had more to do with American tactics than a failure of Japanese tactics.

Kamikaze pilots are different to infantry wearing C-4 vests. I'm not sure the latter would be an effective tactic in war, but it is a great tactic of terror. They may be evil and crazy but terrorists aren't silly: why spend billions on a war when you can spend thousands on terrorists? Soldiers fight soldiers at enormous expense and nobody cares because that's what soldiers are there for. But one man with a crude explosive can kill and injure a lot of civilians and that grabs people by the heart and the balls because they are civilians too.

The threat for terrorism is not really from what it can do to infrastructure or an economy in terms of real damage; the threat is from what it does to the psyche. Psychological warfare is a powerful weapon for good or bad: my all-time favourite comic book hero, The Phantom, Ghost Who Walks, The Man that Cannot Die, Guardian of the Eastern Dark, in all his best adventures uses psychological warfare to great effect in his tireless battle against piracy, greed, cruelty and injustice. More often than not the ne'er-do-well's fear of the Phantom legend is their undoing, when their foe is no more than a fit, armed man in a pretty gay costume with a well trained wolf at his side.

Maybe fear itself is something we should be reasonably fearful of?

>>Careful there Tony Lavis, I think that horse might be too high for you. When you fall off, you will do yourself an injury.<<

Never mind the perils of gravitational attraction; obviously I should be wary of your scorching wit. A man could get himself burned.

>>What do you suggest we do ?<<

If they break the law, prosecute them. Religion is not a defense that is accepted in criminal law in any jurisdiction in Australia. If I were to take a spray can and write 'Moslemes eunt domus' (or even 'Moslemi ite domum') all over the town hall I would be prosecuted for vandalism and rightly so: if I then tried to subsequently tried to plea 'it's a fair cop guv, but the Bible made me done it' a judge would probably find me in contempt. Such a defense definitely wouldn't get past a jury.

If you don't think Australian criminal law is up to the task of tackling religious extremism then the first step is to start agitating for a referendum: the Constitution under Section 116 prohibits the Commonwealth from making "any law... for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion". Referendums are difficult to pass and have a sound track record of not passing. I would not give you good odds on the public passing one which interferes with something as fundamental as freedom of religion: everybody from the religious right to the hippy douches is going disagree with that idea. But any anti-Islamic law will be struck down as unconstitutional unless Section 116 can be changed. Good luck and may the force be with you; you'll need them both to change Section 116.

Cheers,

Tony

Tony,

Are not religious extremists prosecuted for breaking the law? I thought they were.

Surely Australian law precedes, indeed nullifies any Islamic law or practice, illegal in this country.

Damielle,

If you take (say) ritual killing as an example of a practice that was always abhorrent to Australians and illegal, you can see how imported rituals and traditions can over time gain a foothold behind the curtain of secrecy offered by the ethnic group responsible, even those who might not be totally enamoured with the practice, and finally gain some acceptance by authorities because it is so widespread and 'will happen anyhow', so we might as well bend our rules and laws to 'regulate' and 'contain' it.

Jews and Muslims practice ritual slaughter that was always outdated and cruel, and definitely so for the larger animals bred over decades for the market. As you might imagine, one long pull of a sharp knife across the throat of a large steer with its heavily muscled neck is just not going to work, is it? Backyards and boutique works provided the meat and still do in many cases.

Muslims have accepted a stun that must not kill the animal immediately, requiring the hacking of the knife to complete the result. Because animals and circumstances differ, that is not always successful in a 'tidy' death. Jews are not as flexible.

The end result is 'definite' regulation with indefinite outcomes and expected non-compliance in some cases.

The only hopes of not importing offensive rituals and traditions are not to bring in too many of the same ethnic group and particularly from the same locale; and try your damnest to avoid the concentration of the populations in 'burbs and towns. As well as the obvious downsides of concentrations of ethnic groups, it also results in pressure on local members and on political parties.

The extreme multiculturalism that is the vogue of the self-styled political 'Progressives' is more likely to produce than reduce problems.

It is worth adding that populations that are removed from their origin country may not gradually lose such traditions and rituals. Some practices such as kidnap brides continue in countries of migration long after the practice has been curtailed in the country of origin, and can grow more rigid.

"""
Even those met, who haven't had middle-class advantages, have aspirations for their children, and don't want them to follow fundamentalism.
"""

Well these are real run of the mill Muslims and they seem to disagree with your point of view.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bV710c1dgpU

Just Saying!

Dear Danielle,

As I stated earlier -
All Australians are free to follow
any religion they choose, so long as its practices
do not break any Australian law. They're also free not
to follow a religion. Religious laws have no legal
status in Australia.

onthebeach,

You make extremely valid points.

There is undoubtedly the need for more, and legally enforcing strictures. I am not PC in ignoring the pounding of elephants round the room.

Perhaps we need to ramp up some of our laws ... such as cruelty to animals. Unfortunately, we know of horrors committed in some of our own abattoirs; a number have been prosecuted, undoubtedly many not. By making cruelty to animals a graver offence than seen now, then these laws could be extended into other areas.

I am aware of diy circumcisions with terrible results. Ask any doctor at children's hospitals and they will tell of deformities they have had to correct, indeed of medical emergencies. Obviously, averting the eyes to such issues is wrong; these should be addressed.

When married migrants arrive, I believe that the age of marriage of the woman needs be established. If evidence indicates that she was married under-age, she should have the right either to be considered single or to be married legally under our law.

There are many issues that could/should be resolved.

Interestingly, Muslim women have set up refuges for young women and girls promised or being forced into marriages. Many such women are seeing the freedom of our women, and they are increasingly unhappy about their own situations. Perhaps it will be the women who are at the forefront of change. These women are certainly challenging traditional rights.

RawMustard,

Perhaps many Muslims do ascribe to stoning of adulterers, execution of homosexuals and also apostates. But unless they actually enforce this, they are not committing a crime.

Foxy..If everybody understands that it must eventually be integrated
living together, then we can go forward in peace. Otherwise
if it is segregated living together in big-divided-by-culture
tribes, well look at the Arabs and the Jews. Bloody territorial
warfare with no solution on either side.

Australians pick your future, integration or big-divided-by-culture
tribes. It will probably be your children or grandchildren's
future you set in place not yours.

I take heart Foxy that you and your family have integrated well'
and I also hope that next generations will do so too.

That is the point I am trying to get across to those who think
they can live in cultural divide forever. I want us all to be one
big happy integrated people,
I don't give a dam if people have different religions or
food styles as long as they don't practise division and segregation.

onthebeach

Thank you

Foxy-"As I stated earlier -
All Australians are free to follow
any religion they choose, so long as its practices
do not break any Australian law. They're also free not
to follow a religion. Religious laws have no legal
status in Australia."

They could very quickly gain legal status if ever you get
a majority of fundamentalists elected to parliament.
Notice "the Family First Party" who recently stood for
parliament" Or the huge political lobbying of politicians
by the church over "gay marriage." The church can refuse to
marry gays any time they like. So why are they trying to
interfere with the legal law-making of the country.

Most churches try their darndest to push their ideas into government
all the time. They couldn't remain non-political if they tried.
It is so important that a parliament of fundamentalist religious
believers never gains complete control in Government again.

Sorry Foxy my sweet, I know you believe what you say, but I can't possibly agree. I'm afraid it is your wishful thinking, & nothing else talking there.

There is just too much history proving it goes the other way, when different communities with very different religions or cultures occupy the same space. The less industrious community always blames their ethnicity, & the "others" for their lack of success, prosperity.

We are heading for another Sri Lanka, Bosnia and Herzegovina, or a hundred other such civil wars, because we have been stupid enough to believe this multiculturalism rubbish.

Our earlier immigration, particularly post WW11 worked because our intake was similar to the existing population, allowing full integration, which was actively promoted.

Every where we have large ethnic populations we have high crime, often leading to street gang warfare.

You may recall my son had his skull fractured in 4 places, when attacked by a bunch of 4 of Sydney's "Lebs", simply because he was walking home alone & white. Fools like Tony Lavis will try to find some excuse for this behavior, right up until it happens to him. I wonder if even that will cause some of our idiots to wake up, before it's too late.

"The issue of whether Australia should give formal legal recognition to Sharia law in resolving family law disputes involving Muslims will be canvassed in this paper. The case for and against such recognition is outlined. Debate on this issue has gained currency across common law jurisdictions due to several recent events. One was the legal recognition given to Islamic arbitration in the province of Ontario, Canada, in 2004. Although the enabling sections of the Arbitration Act were subsequently repealed, it did ignite the possibility that within a common law system there could be faith-based dispute resolution for family law and other legal matters. The second event was the Archbishop of Canterbury's address to the Royal Courts of Justice (Williams, 2008), in which he promoted the concept of Britain becoming a "plural jurisdiction" by accommodating aspects of Sharia law. Although this speech provoked opposition from some other members of Britain's legal, political and religious communities (including some Muslim groups), the Lord Chief Justice of Britain came to the Archbishop's defence by also supporting alternative dispute resolution using Sharia principles. Whether this is the right direction for Australia or whether we should retain the status quo needs consideration and debate."

Quote is from http://www.aifs.gov.au/institute/pubs/fm2010/fm84/fm84h.html

In the past there has been Religious Law enshrined in Civil Law e.g.
The Sunday Observance Act in NSW.
There is every possibility that narrow sectional interests will succeed in imposing their will on the people again; the Greens are trying to do so all the time.

Dear CHERFUL and Hasbeen,

I can only go by my own experiences and those of
my family.

Of course I realise that the issue of immigation is
a controversial one and the question of whether
government should attempt to imcrease immigration
levels remains a controversial one. Nevertheless,
people continue to come from other countries and make
Australia home, and although over 90 per cent of
Australians are of European descent, (a direct result
of Australian immigration policies), the population is
slowly becoming more representative of the region.

Of course there have been and always will be problems
from within these diverse groups. However, most people
start families, buy homes, establish careers and make
a place for themselves. Most feel gratitude, as they
believe that migrating here allowed them to change
their lives and the lives of their families for the better.
Often too the children of migrants, who had previously
denied their cultural heritage, find an increasing
interest in precisely those things they had rejected, as
they become more confident in their new society.

To me one of the most unique and rewarding aspects of
living in this country and the nature of being Australian
is to be part of this diversity.

I think it was Suse who once wrote that of course there
are bad people amongst each group that comes to this country
the same as there are good people that come. The bad people
are a minority and we should not judge the majority by the
actions of a few. The same as we should look at the
underlying reasons of what causes their behaviour.
All Australians are equal under the law and that means
that nobody should be treated differently from anybody else
because of their race, ethnicity or country of origin,
because of their age, gender, marital status, or disability
or because of their political or religious beliefs.

We've had our problems in the past and we've always worked
through them. I firmly believe that we'll continue to do
so in the future as well.

cont'd ...

Dear Hasbeen,

I'm sorry about what happened to your son.

My nephew was bashed by several blokes on campus a few years ago
while coming to the defence of a young girl. He ended up in
a coma and eventually with
a plate in his head. - He still has quite a few problems today.
The guys who bashed him were of European descent.

As I stated earlier - thugs (bad people)
come from all nationalities. No one group has a monopoly
on it.

I think you will find this interesting. Two or parts.

By Dr. Tawfik Hamid

"I am a Muslim by faith, a Christian by spirit, a Jew by heart,and
above all I am a human being."

Dr. Hamid is an Egyptian scholar and author of the following article.
The world needs more people like him -
ones who have the courage to face-up to reality, and not fear those who oppose honesty.

By Dr. Tawfik Hamid
I was born a Muslim and lived all my life as a follower of Islam.
After the barbaric terrorist attacks done by the hands of my fellow
Muslims everywhere on this globe, and after the too many violent acts
by Islamists in many parts of the world, I feel responsible as a
Muslim and as a human being to speak out and tell the truth to
protect the world and Muslims as well from a coming catastrophe and
war of civilizations.

I have to admit that our current Islamic teaching creates violence
and hatred toward non-Muslims.

We Muslims are the ones who need to change.
Until now we have accepted polygamy, the beating of women by men, and killing those who convert from Islam to other religions.

We have never had a clear and strong stand against the concept of slavery or wars, to spread our religion and to subjugate others to Islam and force them to pay a humiliating tax called jizia.

We ask others to respect our religion while all the time we curse non-Muslims loudly (in Arabic) in our Friday prayers in the mosques

What message do we convey to our children when we call the Jews "descendants of the pigs and monkeys"? [Yet, both Arabs and Jews are descendants of Ibrahim (Abraham)!]

Is this a message of love and peace, or a message of hate?
I have been into [Christian] churches and [Jewish] synagogues where they were praying for Muslims.

Cont.

While all the time, we curse them, and teach our generations to call them "infidels", and to hate them

We immediately jump in a 'knee jerk reflex' to defend Prophet Mohammad when someone accuses him of being a pedophile while, at the same time, ....we are proud with the story in our Islamic books that he married a young girl seven years old [Aisha] when he was above 50 years old.

I am sad to say that many, if not most of us, rejoiced in happiness after September 11th and after many other terror attacks.

Muslims denounce these attacks to look good in front of the media, but we condone the Islamic terrorists and sympathise with their cause.


Until now our 'reputable' top religious authorities have never issued a fatwa or religious statement to proclaim Bin Laden as an apostate, while an author, like Rushdie, was declared an apostate who should be killed according to Islamic Shari'a law just for writing a book criticizing Islam.

Muslims demonstrated to get more religious rights as we did in France to stop the ban on the hijab (head scarf), while we did not demonstrate with such passion and in such numbers against the terrorist murders. It is our absolute silence against the terrorists that gives the energy to these terrorists to continue doing their evil acts.
Cont

Cont.
We Muslims need to stop blaming our problems on others or on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

As a matter of honesty, Israel is the only light of democracy, civilization, and human rights in the whole Middle East .

We kicked out the Jews with no compensation or mercy from most of the Arab countries to make them "Jews-free countries" while Israel accepted more than a million Arabs to live there, have their own nationality, and enjoy their rights as human beings. In Israel, women cannot be beaten legally by men, and any person can change his/her belief system with no fear of being killed by the Islamic law of 'apostasy,' while in our Islamic world people do not enjoy any of these rights.

I agree that the 'Palestinians' suffer, but they suffer because of their corrupt leaders and not because of Israel .

It is not common to see Arabs who live in Israel leaving to live in the Arab world.

On the other hand, we used to see thousands of Palestinians going to work with happiness in Israel , its 'enemy.' If Israel treats Arabs badly as some people claim, surely we would have seen the opposite happening.

We Muslims need to admit our problems and face them. Only then we can treat them and start a new era to live in harmony with human mankind.


Our religious leaders have to show a clear, and very strong stand against polygamy,

paedophilia, slavery, killing those who convert from Islam to other religion, beating of women by men, and declaring wars on non-Muslims to spread Islam.

Then, and only then, do we have the right to ask others to respect our religion..

The time has come to stop our hypocrisy and say it openly: 'We Muslims have to change !
---
Whew that took a bit of cutting and pasting.
I don't have the link for this, but it would be nice to think he is
not on his own. The question is will he survive assassination ?

Foxy, "As I stated earlier - thugs (bad people)come from all nationalities. No one group has a monopoly on it"

Top police have said quite regularly that we have to stop importing violent people, those whose tradition is to resolve disputes with knives or a gun.

What your political correctness of blaming all Australians for the gun and knife crimes that are regular events in our capitals like Sydney in particular is protect the offenders and divert any steps towards better immigration selection. Immigration Department official strongly advised ex-PM Malcolm Fraser from importing the violent Lebanese Muslim thugs who terrorise Sydney.

<Gold Coast bikie gangs are actively targeting hot-blooded young Muslim and Eastern European men as they seek to beef up their ranks with aggressive ethnic recruits.

Criminal bikie gangs boost numbers with young Muslim and Eastern European recruits

Sources say gangs such as the Bandidos are embracing multiculturalism, signing up Lebanese, Turkish and Balkan members, many from Sydney and Melbourne.

The trend mirrors the early stages of the rise of crime gangs in southern states who recruited from ethnic groups, sources say>
http://tinyurl.com/bikie-violence

<Ethnic crime: Middle Eastern bikie gangs at war in Sydney

On Monday July 29, 2013 two Middle Eastern males with links to bikie gangs and terrorists were killed just kilometres - and minutes - apart, becoming the latest victims of Sydney's out-of-control gun violence.

The targeted attacks were reportedly linked to an ongoing lethal bikie turf war between the Comanchero and Hells Angels gangs.

Vasko Boskovski and Bassil Hijazi died in a hail of bullets in Sydney's southwest, the 20th and 21st person to be killed by assassins' bullets since Barry O'Farrell came to power in March 2011>
http://australian-news.net/articles/view.php?id=136

What politically correct people such as yourself also do is support nasty regulation that prevents the free speech that can surface and criticise such immigration and social engineering policy mistakes.

Of course that politically correctness has already succeeded in muzzling the media and police in describing suspects sought for violent crime and it has ensured that appropriate statistics are not kept to enable research to advise policy.

Interesting comments, I prefer to look at history with open eyes and remain neutral. Every race, religion and people are guilty of killing those who refuse to bow the knee. All have shown 'no mercy' in their purging of the 'enemy'. Australia killed/murdered many 'nationals' to settle here. That was British colonial rule practised for centuries and continues today in the form of banking and world policies. I do not understand the 'need' to impose one's will on other nations, especially when that nation is in severe trouble within both economically and socially.(USA, Britain, Australia, Arab states and European Union. The United Nations is also a 'beast' with an ugly agenda. Christianity 'today', in it's true form, is to help nurture, protect, defend and love all people regardless of origin, religion, behaviour etc, with unconditional love toward all people. Islam 'today' has one motive, to force all people to convert to Islam or die. There is plenty of evidence to prove this claim. This is the most intolerant 'religion' today. There is no compromise. We should not be making deals with Islam or passing laws to give Islam rights in Australia. Australian citizens have 'rights', you are either a 'citizen' or 'visitor' with 'rights' according to status.

A link covering much of Dr Hamid's article as reported by Bazz is at
http://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/we-muslims-have-to-change-says-dr-tawfik-hamid/

The very fact that he has to be protected from assassination shows that it is not "radical" Islam that he is describing but mainstream Islam, routinely prettified by Western apologists inventing a distinction from "radical" or "fundamentalist" Islam. Read the works for example of Islamic scholar Ibn Warraq referenced point by point on material in the Koran and other Moslem "holy books".

What Tawfik Hamad points out are the very characteristics of Islam that render us suicidally stupid to allow it a foothold in Australia.

None of these characteristics, however, in any way justifies settlers ruling by their own "law" any part of Palestine without the democratically expressed permission of the inhabitants including the exiles. The fact that Arabs would rather live in the grabbed region than in the bantustans means no more than the fact that victims of the British Empire would give their shirt for "right of abode" in Britain. A Palestine-wide election, with a vote for everyone with a genuine birthright to call Palestine home, would see what the people of the country wanted. Would the interlopers accept THAT? Thought not. In speaking up for the occupiers, Dr Hamid of the Bush-Cheney Potomac Think-tank (Google it!), is merely singing for his supper

Why Islam has 'rights' to 'pray' over our food and call it 'Halal' and charge money for this when they are a small minority population is a blight on our government. People who speak with hatred for this country and it's people should be deported immediately. I know a democracy means 'freedom of speech', it does not mean a 'freedom to act'. If Oz citizens behaved like this in Moslem nations they would either be jailed or killed, this is the reality. Here, they get away with murder, rape, violence, criminal activities and scream 'Discrimination' when they are punished. They even yell 'it is our right to do so, the 'holy Koran' tells us to kill all infidels, (an infidel is anyone who refuses to follow Mohammed and the Koran, so, look out atheists, homosexuals, Christians, Buddhists, Hindi. All of us who refuse to follow Islam are enemies of Islam and there is no room in their world for people like us. Read the Koran and you will see that this is a true statement. Moslem's will deny this, history and recent speeches prove this is the agenda. We have been 'dis-armed' by a previous government, 'they' know this. As one who believes in God, I see a need to end hatred and persecution because of differences. We are called to be His servant to all men, non judging or condemning, however, we are also to be wise, that means protecting all people from others who would do them harm. As a Christian man today, I do all I can to encourage others to be honest people of integrity with a clear conscience toward all people. Do that which is good and abstain from evil. A very simple, biblical teaching to live by.

Bazz,

There a a number of Islamic reformers from the Middle East, who want to see changes made. They state, however, that this is unlikely to happen when the high priests of political correctness in the west support certain practices occurring in refusing to acknowledge these, let alone condemn them. These reformers go on to observe that this condemns their people to ongoing misery. One likened this to the old attitude of "the white man's burden".

We have greatly benefitted from our reformers of the past. None would deny that. It is a great shame that we can't look with clear eyes at the inhumanity of certain practices and support those who want change.

the servants/quote..<<..The United Nations..is also a 'beast' with an ugly agenda...>>

yes i..agree..with..your rave

<<..Christianity 'today', in it's true form,
is to help nurture, protect, defend and love all people
regardless of origin, religion, behaviour etc, with unconditional love toward all people.>>

yes i..agree again

but then..you..do..a very..un-fairly

<<Islam 'today'..has one motive,>>

please reveal proof..they dohave one binding motive
[their messenger..BUT..THEN..get very messed up..in..what he said
but their one constant=their messenger[may peace be upon..them all]

sohow can ANY..true christian..say this..

THIER ONE MOTIVATION..[according to you+..<<..to force all people to convert to Islam or die.>>

as wiki-pedia..would say
citation/needed*

<<..There is plenty of evidence..to prove this claim.>>

nodoudt ina list of texts?
please present them..[which translation?]
you claim..ALL..then all..must be consistant?
soi need only present one different..and EVERYONE..KNOWS YOUR*..LYING

thus..[not]..even a TRUE*christian..jesus could be proud of
[YOUR NOT EVEN..*trying..to love neighbour[get it?]

you got a twisted mind-set..there..my beloved Brother
i..suggest you figure out..what jesus was saying

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040&page=0#176496

I know a delightful Muslim woman and her young son. She received asylum in this country.

She and her husband, Saudis, were western educated, he a doctor and she a nurse. When I first met her she was wearing jeans and T-shirt. This young woman had to flee Saudi Arabia.

Her crime. Her husband believed that there was something wrong with their child. He divorced her. As she explained. Being a divorced woman in Saudi Arabia, both she and her son had limited life expectancies. Her gratitude to the Australian government for accepting them was beyond words.

Unfortunately, these attitudes towards women are prevalent. An Australian friend married a Kashmiri Muslim, nominally Muslim only. He was a scientist and they lived in Pakistan. Needing to do more study in the US and unable to take her and their two small children. he arranged for them to live in a local convent. Even this proved unsafe for her and she fled back to Australia. Some of his own friends added to the problem.

Further comment.

These attitudes are not endemic across the Muslim world.

Indonesians do not ascribe to these beliefs. When Lady Gaga's concert was banned in Indonesia, many were outraged. One writer commented that they did not want teachers of Riyadah entering their country bringing with them an un-culture.

Dear Danielle,

I buy the Australian Woman's Weekly for my mum
every month and in the November 2013 issue
an article my caught my eye:

http://www.almuderis.com.au/news/222-from-penniless-prisoner-to-bionic-surgeon

Professor Muderis had to flee Iraq after he refused Saddam's
regime brutal orders to surgically remove the ears of soldiers
who escaped from the army. He ended up on a flimsy wooden boat
heading to his new home, Australia. He was one of many
"boat people." His contribution to this country and
internationally has been outstanding.

The following link gives his biography:

http://www.almuderis.com.au/about-us/assoc-prof-al-muderis

Foxy,

Thank you for information of this extraordinary man. Indeed, he is an asset to Australia.

Importantly, he has been given some media coverage. We need more of this to offset so much negativity.

Dear Danielle,

He is so happy to be in Australia and is giving back
so much. His wife is also a GP and both of them
are remarkable people. Yet Philip Ruddock, then
Immigration Minister, had told Prof. Muderis when
the Prof. was in detention that the Prof's qualifications
would not be recognised in Australia. Prof. Muderis
when asked what would he say to Mr Ruddick today, smiled
and replied, "Let's talk, mate." (or words to that effect).

As you said - and extra-ordinary man indeed - and he's not
the only asylum-seeker with courage and determination who's
got a lot to contribute to this country. It's a shame
that not enough publicity is given to these people, but
instead emphasis is placed on negativity for political gain.

Whilst there is discussion, valid discussion albeit, of Islamic thugs in our society, I think there should be a balance demonstrated. This is no way absolves some of the problems we see, but should be recognised.

Most of the medical care workers, both doctors and nurses, in our public hospitals are from overseas. And most of these people would be Muslim. Their care of patients is exemplary; undoubtedly they do not indentify their patients as infidels.

This same phenomenon is evident in other areas, such as aged care facilities, including private facilities.

If it were not for these people our public health system would grind to a crashing stop.

we do it this way..because it works
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ww-ORDesbdU

an..inspiring palestinian
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=palisteinian+dooctter+forgives
#
I Shall Not Hate: A Gaza Doctor's Journey

Born in a refugee camp in 1955,..Palestinian physician Abuelaish suffers a..catastrophic loss when three of his daughters are killed..in their home by Israeli-fire
#
Dr. Izzeldin Abuelaish's remarkable story of forgiveness.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zwFE_5zuh_g

Danielle,

<<Most of the medical care workers, both doctors and nurses, in our public hospitals are from overseas. And most of these people would be Muslim.>>

I rather doubt that *MOST* would be muslim! Maybe in some localities but the across the board--I have huge doubts!

Danielle "If it were not for these people our public health system would grind to a crashing stop."

That's odd, because I'm sure I recall a health system filled with White Australian doctors and nurses when I grew up.

And White taxi drivers, White cleaners, White welders, White butchers, etc.
We used to do *everything* without them, and we could do so again.
We just need the balls to put our own people first.

Dear Shockadelic,

The current health care agencies due to Mr
Abbott's axe cuts probably could not afford
to hire the "white" staff you speak of.
We need to be grateful that we have caring
people who are able to work for lower wages
and yet still maintain the care necessary,
especially in our aged care facilities.
We're now stuck with a government that believes
in the politics of money, profit, and power.
Surpluses are more important that the front-line
staff in hospitals.

Dear Shockadelic,

An Australian regardless of his or her skin colour or religion is one of our people. Australia is a country whose legal system is based on its constitution. There is nothing in that constitution which defines being Australian in terms of ethnicity, race or religion.

I do wish that we could have a definition of what a 'white' person is, so that we could be all talking the same language.

".....I prefer to look at history with open eyes and remain neutral. Every race, religion and people are guilty of killing those who refuse to bow the knee. All have shown 'no mercy' in their purging of the 'enemy'. Australia killed/murdered many 'nationals' to settle here. That was British colonial rule practised for centuries and ...."
and that was why the Mabo deciion was reached the British Government of the day respected the rights of the original inhabitants.
That is also why the Maori enjoy the benefits of the Treaty of Waitangi

Servant of God, I suggest that you brush up on history

" All of us who refuse to follow Islam are enemies of Islam and there is no room in their world for people like us"

I would further suggest that you read the Qur'an and other Islamic writings on "People of the Book", which includes Jews, Christians and Hindus.

Foxy, "The current health care agencies due to Mr Abbott's axe cuts probably could not afford to hire the "white" staff"

What complete rot! You are making things up as you go. There has been high unemployment of nurses in Australia for years. Nurses and Nursing Federation spokespeople have regularly drawn attention to the many nurse graduates who have been unable to get jobs, owe a small fortune in HECS debt and look like losing their nursing registration because they cannot get work. They have been finding hold-over jobs as waitresses and cleaners for goodness sakes.

If as someone else has said, hospitals are being staffed by Muslim nurses I would need to be convinced of that. However if there is any truth in it, it is an indictment of immigration policy and education and manpower planning at the highest levels of government.

There is no doubt at all that federal and States planning do not link and there is no whole of government approach. Having said that, there is no possibility it could be improved by more central control or reporting to Canberra. That is where so many problems spring form anyhow.

Maybe if the federal government could curtail the blow-out of taxpayers' $$ expended annually on the victim industries, on illegal immigrants, multiculturalism, Office of women with status and indigenous housing that never seems to get built but costs mega-millions, the ambulances would not be ramped outside hospital emergency departments, hospital beds would be available, nursing graduates would find work, and we would be able to build up the numbers of trained, experienced nurses required by the booming population and changed demographics.

Dear Foxy,

I am referring to my observations of two years ago. I do not know what the health system will be like with Abbott's cuts ...

SPQR,

You may be right that Islamic health-care workers are not the majority across the board; it would be an interesting exercise to establish the % of this group in relationship to others.
However, I suspect an exercise of this nature would not be PC.

From my experience of a month in two different public hospitals a couple of years ago, Muslims were certainly the majority there. They were also first rate. I have never been one to bend the knee to doctors, so am not impressed easily.

This experience was also notable for the fact that there were very few white doctors and nurses in either hospitals.

Having a husband in a private high-care facility, I can assure you that, again, non-Europeans were the majority of health carers.

The Muslims I encountered were far removed from the thugs as mentioned above. I would also opine that the numbers of the former group are far, far in excess of those of the latter.

As I have stated, I do not ignore an elephant in the room. But one has to be absolutely even handed.

Danielle,

I have no problem believing the majority in metro centres may be of non-European background, and there are probably a lot of reasons for that. Not least, the fact that as part of the education package we offer overseas medical students is the opportunity to work in Oz medical centres and perhaps qualify for residency.

<<The Muslims I encountered were far removed from the thugs >>
Maybe, but I am always reminded of a piece I read from a former expat family who lived in Iran.They were astounded at --with the ascendency of the ayatollah --how quickly neighbours and friends who they had known for years as moderate Muslims almost overnight became rabid fundamentalists calling for the death of all infidels.

And how many times have we all heard from neighbours and friends that terrorist x was such a nice chap and showed no signs of being an extremist, they couldn't believe he would ever do anything like that.

I rather question the wisdom of encouraging migration from peoples who hold firmly to sacred books which call for the destruction of non-believers.

Foxy said;
Surpluses are more important that the front-line
staff in hospitals.

errr, without surpluses there will be no staff !
either that or debt you cannot pay off.
Ring any bells ?

It would be a very brave person who would claim looking back will see the issue fixed in just this country or the world.
50 years from now do not expect centurys of hate to have died away.
Can we confront a truth, western nations are steaming away from religion.
Just have an honest look at the numbers fewer by far are practicing their religion.
It is not so for this faith.
Poorer less educated country,s are the growth are as for all religion.
I see much pain ahead and we only need see the middle east and Muslim Murdering Muslim to understand some of the true concerns such a religion brings with it.

Belly wrote: "I see much pain ahead and we only need see the middle east and Muslim Murdering Muslim to understand some of the true concerns such a religion brings with it."

Such a religion? One can look at the massive destruction and death in the Wars of the Reformation. One need not go back that far. Protestants and Catholics slaughtering each other in Northern Ireland. Orthodox and Catholics slaughtering each other in Bosnia. Christianity is also such a religion. From past and recent examples it is a concern under the appropriate social conditions. There is an undercurrent of violence and hate in Christianity. Where there is general prosperity without great social inequities as there is in Scandinavia the evil of Christianity is countered.

otb,

I was merely quoting what I had been told by the
Director of Nursing at two Blu-Cross aged-care
facilities here in Melbourne. They hired migrant
staff because they were cheaper - and excellent.
And this is straight from the "horses -mouth."
It confirms what Danielle was saying earlier.

Dear Bazz,

The cuts in Queensland to hospitals that have been
done recently by the current government there
with front-line nursing staff are outrageous.
And the same is happening in Victoria currently.
So say what you will, the facts are there.
Of course our current new government blames everything
on the carbon-tax - while my daughter-in-law who
is on the board of one of the largest hospitals
here in Melbounre - can't believe the rhetoric.

cont'd ...

Dear Bazz,

Having surpluses is important - but so is balance.
Concentrating only on the debt side of the ledger
and neglecting the asset side (and infrastructure)
presents even larger problems down the track.

The fastest growing religion in the USA is ISLAM because it appeals to the thuggish ethnic male.

Dear Josephus,

Historically the Catholic religion does a pretty
good job as well.
Attack-dog policies are the foundation stones of
Catholic Christian Brothers schools as my husband
can attest - he was a product of them. It's
turned him off religion.

Islam is not uniform.

Indonesia has the highest Islamic population in the world.

I lived in Malaysia some years back. Women wore fitting sarongs and diaphanous kabayas, they wore their hair loose and long and makeup. They danced with men, there was no restriction of movement between them. Islam was a gentle and benign religion. There have been changes, but I don't see Malays nor Indonesians ever ascribing to any violence

We have had Muslims in this country since the 19th century. There a different Islamic populations here - and quite disparate ... and need one say, expressing not only disapproval but horror at some activities of others.

Dear Danielle,

I think that many people know little about various
religions and especially about Islam. Religious
fervor has erupted in the Islamic world in general,
and in the Middle East in particular. This fervor
has been inspired by fundamentalism and to many
Westerners, Islamic fundamentalism seems like an
almost scandalour return to a medieval morality.
We've covered this ground before of Islamic
fundamentalism conjuring forth images of women behind
veils, od adulterers being stoned, of thieves having
their hands cut off, of public floggins and executions,
of martyrdom in holy wars, and, in extreme cases, of
ppolitical fanaticism exemplified in aircraft hijackings
and terrorist bombings.

And as I stated in the past this picture is rather
distorted, for it is based on what's newsworthy.
Also part of the problem when discussing migrants,
especially non-British migrants, people are often
tempted to lump all newcomers together and treat them as
one homogenous species.

Nothing is further from the truth.

Australiam immigrants vary a great deal in their ethnic
backgrounds, religions, and educational levels.
Their current social and educational needs are not
homogenous either. People have settled in Australia for
various reasons, there's those seeking asylum, others
want a change of lifestyle, others family reunions,
and so on.

The early months after arrival in a new country call for the
greatest adjustment, not only for the migrant, but also
for the local people who interact with the migrant.

And therein the problems become complex and solving them an
ongoing process.

Danielle,
<<I lived in Malaysia some years back. Women wore fitting sarongs and diaphanous kabayas, they wore their hair loose and long and makeup. They danced with men, there was no restriction of movement between them>>

Wow! It sounds just like pre-revolutionary Iran --see here:
http://filipspagnoli.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/the-vagaries-of-moral-progress-2-womens-rights-in-iran/

Perhaps all they need to turn things around is an Indonesian Or Malaysian ayatollah!

" One need not go back that far. Protestants and Catholics slaughtering each other in Northern Ireland......"

Let's not fall for the old fallacy that the recent fighting in British Occupied Ireland was religious, it was political and mainly about human rights and on Britain's side access to possible under-sea oil deposits.

There were Protestants in the IRA and the Fathers of Irish Republicanism were Protestants; in fact the first elected President of the Irish Republic, Dr Douglas Hyde, was a Protestant and elected by a 90%+ Catholic electorate.

Well Is Mise stole my thunder.
In Northern Ireland you could remove religion and the troubles would
still go on because the main driver was unification of all Ireland.
Religion just added spice to the mix.

I think to compare 21st century Islam with 21st century Christianity
is just plain silly.
Anyone who tried reinterpret and publish a King James version of
the Koran is likely to find himself very quickly dead.
Look at Salmon Rushtie still in a safe house.

Anyway Islam is a fascist political movement wrapped in a cloak of religion.

The Holocaust where 6,000,000 were slaughtered because they were Jews was fueled by centuries of Christian hatred. I know of nothing that Islam has done that approaches the magnitude of that crime.

Well, there probably were no populations of that size easily available.
But they did try, and a lot of populations said oh yes, yes we will become moslems.
So they saved the effort.

Dear Bazz,

The Jews did not have the option of becoming Christians. Those who had become Christians were slaughtered by the Nazis anyway because of their ancestry.

Danielle,

The thread has moved on and I do not want to divert it from its course, however you are right about the number of temporary visas for Muslim nurses and likely the number obtaining citizenship thereafter.

Foxy's remarks are still wrong and offensive on two counts.

First, Foxy was obviously partisan and wrong to claim, "The current health care agencies due to Mr Abbott's axe cuts probably could not afford to hire the "white" staff you speak of", when it occurred under Labor's watch, PM Julia Watshername and her Greens sidekicks, and under Kevin Rudd.

Secondly, Foxy was condescending and wrong (her cultural cringe again) to accept and repeat that the Muslim nurses are somehow better and accept lower pay than her disliked 'whites', who apparently are not as good according to Foxy's preferred anecdotal source and expect Award conditions (shock, horror!).

Just adding to the last, Foxy might welcome the lower nursing pay and conditions through immigration of Asian nurses, saying,

"We need to be grateful that we have caring people who are able to work for lower wages.."

and the previous Labor government strongly facilitated the policy.

It does not reflect too kindly on Julia Wahtshername though, who Foxy puts on a pedestal. More of Julia's lies: in fact it now appears that she was active in undermining the employment rights, conditions and pay in an industry that is almost completely female. The education and training policies of the previous Labor governments must have been abject failures if our own nursing graduates cannot find work, requiring hundreds of Muslim nurses to be imported instead.

As with any government policy I don't especially care what it is or what money is spent, as long as the electorate and those most affected are properly consulted, ie., directly consulted, not decisions taken behind closed doors. I am not aware of Kevin Rudd or Julia Wahtshername ever mentioning to the electorate or being up-front with nurses that they intended to warp their employment conditions (as Foxy has applauded!).

Labor and their Greens sidekicks pose as the protectors of workers. Yeah, right!(sic)

Hi Davidf,

<<The Holocaust where 6,000,000 were slaughtered because they were Jews was fueled by centuries of Christian hatred. I know of nothing that Islam has done that approaches the magnitude of that crime>>

The Muslim conquest and attempted conversion of India produced a genocide on a scale many times larger than the Jewish holocaust.

“From the time when Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, remarks Alain Danielou, the history of India becomes a long monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the Barbarians have destroyed civilisations, wiped-out entire races. Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazini: in 103O the holy city of Benares was razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked. Indeed, the Muslim policy “vis à vis” India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined”. http://francoisgautier.me/2013/08/23/the-muslims-invasions-of-india/

“Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like punishing the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty." [Dr. Koenraad Elst:“Was There an Islamic Genocide of Hindus?]

(Koenard Elst estimates 80 million Hindus were killed in the total jihad against India.)

"the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history." [American historian, Will Durant]

Dear Danielle,

I need to correct the poster known as "on the beach"
he's once again attributing things to me
that I neither said nor think. And, as I stated in my
earlier post the information that I gave earlier was from
the Blue-Cross Organisation (one of the largest in Victoria)
and their policies in the hiring of their staff. The
Director was being very frank and open. I am not against
any "white" staff, nor do I place any politician on a
pedestal. Although I do criticise the ones I feel could
do better. And that's my right as a citizen and a voter in
a democratic society

otb,

Kindly back up your statements and accusations
against me with facts and indicate to us all
where I have done what you accuse me of.

As Belly once told you, "you invent my thoughts
and then slander me with that invention."

So I will (quoting Belly again), "Post what you wish
but please do not in your blind and rude fashion refer
to me."

Your behaviour towards me on this forum
comes under the heading of cyber-bullying and you
can be legally held to account.

SPQR,

You are correct about the genocide of Hindus which was over a considerable period, thirteen centuries.

There is one great difference though. The Nazi pogrom against Jews was not a war, where Jews could even defend themselves ... and very rarely escape. The numbers killed were over a relatively short period.

Before WWII Germany was considered the most cultured and civilised country in Europe ... . and we are only looking at 70 years ago.

The nazis employed a very efficient bureaucratic machine to identify Jews. They even knew the number of Jews in Albania.

Many people were arrested and taken to the gas chambers unaware that they had a Jewish grandparent.

I do not know the numbers of Jews killed over the centuries of Christian rule. But pogroms were frequent and bloody, add to this the regular propaganda, such as Jews were responsible for the plague - and the effect of this upon communities. Then there was the very restrictive lives imposed upon Jews, who were considered pariahs of society.

I personally knew a Pole, who admitted that he and his friends would regularly enter Jewish communities to attack them; any death was of no consequence. Certainly the law had no concerns. This was only pre-war. Undoubtedly, this occurred in many areas outside of Poland.

Dear SPQR,

I have a book called "Atrocitology" by Matthew White. It enumerates mass killings in various circumstances. The section on religious killing lists as the greatest one the 20,000,000 who died in the Taiping Rebellion (1850-64), a messianic uprising of Chinese Christians. You may be right in what you cited. The number of those who have been killed in conflicts is often hard to come by. Whatever the validity of claims for the numbers killed in religious conflicts missionary religions at various times in history are responsible for much slaughter. Zoroastrianism is possibly the least offensive. They neither missionise nor accept converts.

davidf,

Jews don't missionise nor do they accept converts easily. The convert has to establish that he/she is serious and committed about conversion. This is not because of any particular belief that Jews are superior, but due to the realistic knowledge that Jews don't have an easy time of it - even nowdays.

Dear Danielle,

Jews are reluctant to missionise not only because of the disability a Jew might suffer but because of a lesson in Jewish history. King Herod is remembered as an evil person by both Christian and Jewish viewpoints. Over 2 millennia ago Judaism was very much a missionary religion which even resorted to forced conversions. The Idumaeans were forcibly converted to Judaism. King Herod was an Idumaean. After Herod Jews became much more wary of converting people to Judaism.

However, unlike the Zoroastrians, Jews accept converts if they appear sincere and do what is necessary to convert.

America claims that Judeo-Christian values and beliefs are the foundation and driving force behind their social and political system. As a society their overriding motto is “In God We Trust” the Judeo-Christian God of course. Is it not reasonable too conclude that these Judeo-Christian values and beliefs have been the catalyst behind America’s past and present actions to subjugate peoples of the third World. It is constantly claimed that the US is obligated to deliver “Freedom and Democracy” to all. I assume that by default that it has to be delivered to those who do not presently embrace the American ideal, the non believers. What form does this f and d take for the non believers, the answer is simple, the one based on those Judeo-Christian values and beliefs that America holds so dearly. America is a society very much under the political control of organized Christian religion, with its extension to the industrial, military complex. It has been through a belief in the rightness of their Judeo-Christian values and beliefs and its comfortable fit with Capitalism that there has been an overriding US desire to impose the same on others, without any real success. That desire has lead to the destruction of millions, 2 to 4 million in Korea, 3 million in Vietnam. and in more recent times 1.5 million in Afghanistan, 500,000 in Iraq.
The notion that the mass destruction of societies by people through Christianity is a thing of the dim distant past is not true. It may not be as obvious as the Christian Crusades of 11th to 13th centuries, but Christianity is still very much a part of a modern day crusade against the non adherents

david f, "An Australian regardless of his or her skin colour or religion is one of our people."

You're talking about citizenship.
'm talking about the *ethnic group* "Australians", who were, are and always will be White.
Just as Zulus were, are and always will be Black.
And Japanese were, are and always will be Asian.

*Ethnicity* has nothing to do with the constitution, citizenship or the legal system.
If a revolution destroyed the political/legal system tomorrow, there'd still be "Australians" (the ethnic group).

"The Holocaust where 6,000,000 were slaughtered because they were Jews was fueled by centuries of Christian hatred...Those who had become Christians were slaughtered by the Nazis anyway because of their ancestry."

Right. So the *Nazi* persecution was racial, not religious (like previous centuries), as they made perfectly clear.

Foxy, "We're now stuck with a government that believes in the politics of money, profit, and power."

Any money/profit seems important to you too, since you put lower wages above social stability.

"this picture is rather distorted, for it is based on what's newsworthy."

And every other ethnic/religious group has the same potential to be nastily "newsworthy".
So why don't we see nasty Finns or Buddhists in the headlines every day?

"The early months after arrival in a new country call for the greatest adjustment, not only for the migrant, but also for the local people who interact with the migrant."

Which is why it made sense to pick the people requiring the least "adjustment" (White Australia policy).

"The cuts in Queensland to hospitals...the same is happening in Victoria"

So we don't need to import any more nurses then, with so many unemployed.

Is Mise "I do wish that we could have a definition of what a 'white' person is, so that we could be all talking the same language."

Already did: People of European Ethnic Descent
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6098#176245

I rarely refer to "Caucasoids" or "Europeans", when I mean Whites (European ethnic descent).
Because there's Caucasoids from vastly different or unrelated cultural systems (Arab, Indian, Iranian) and millions of "White" people who don't live geographically in Europe.

Paul1405,
Your inference of American agendas to Christianize in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan is spurious nonsense.

All those countries present governments are not christian and accepted by the USA. It is freedom of citizens to freely choose their own future. Communism and extreme Islamic governments do not allow those freedoms.

Dear Shockadelic,

I am not just talking about citizenship. I am talking about humanity. A person regardless of skin colour, ethnicity or religion is as human as you or I. Apparently you would reject a person whose skin colour, religion or ethnicity doesn't match yours.

Fortunately all Australians don't see it your way. The White Australia policy has had its day. It belongs to the unenlightened past.

Foxy,

Why do you think it is OK to pay temporary migrant workers less?

It is interesting that you don't see any social justice problems or possible conflict with social security, labour and immigration legislation.

Bazz said "Well, there probably were no populations of that size easily available. But they did try, and a lot of populations said oh yes, yes we will become moslems. So they saved the effort"

Might I just add that non-Muslims were heavily taxed but for those that converted the tax burden ceased to exist; as a conversion scheme it was a roaring success but like all tax minimization schemes it soon increased the tax burden for all. There was lamentation and gnashing of teeth.

onthebeach,

Don't temporary migrant workers receive the same award rates as others? I would have thought that the unions would want this.

Or am I very naive?

Dear Is Mise,

The no tax for Muslims was not a conversion scheme. In the early period of the Muslim conquests the Arab armies regarded Islam as a religion for Arabs. They discouraged conversion and even punished those who tried to convert as it would lessen the money received in taxes. It was only later that Islam became a missionary religion and non-Arabs were a target for conversion. Everybody, Muslim or not, was later liable to pay taxes, but there was an extra tax for those who were not Muslims.

Shockadelic,

Sorry about that, I missed your earlier post.
"My definition of "White" doesn't change depending on the "context".
It means People Of European Ethnic Descent."

Glad to see that by 'white' you don't mean colour, but don't you find it inconvenient that so many English and other European people have Negroid ancestors?

otb,

I do not think that it is ok to pay migrant workers
less. But apparently large Health-Care Organisations
like Blue-Cross do.

And what makes you think that I don't see any problems
with what these organisations are doing?

Actually Is Mise has brought up an interesting point.
The Jazis tax as it is known is the reason Islamic societies are always
so undeveloped.
It causes people to "convert", or leave the country and so reduce the tax revenue.
Other social factors come into play as moslems starting out with a tax
free life feel resentment against the remaining taxpayers. Not allowing
women to work also reduces the countries productivity.
I read an article about this somewhere.
From memory it was by an economist and he believed that when peak oil
crunch comes the Arab states will collapse as the flow of money from
the oilier states dry up.
I will do a search on Resilience web site and see if I can find it.

Dear David F.,

David E. Springer, American lawyer, stated:

"At all times, vigilance is the price of liberty.
We must remain vigilant because while it might be us
today, it will be some other group down the road
20 years from now.
The measure of our society over history is our fidelity
to our principles. We must remind our government and our
people to remain faithful to those principles or otherwise
our society, like so many in the past, will be swept on the
ash heap of history."

And as historian Robert Conquest stated:

"We should not fool ourselves. The power of fanaticism and
of misunderstanding is by no means extinct."

Thank You for reminding us of the importance of our humanity.

DavidF

<<I have a book called "Atrocitology" by Matthew White. It...>>

So perhaps your original post should have read:

"The Holocaust where 6,000,000 were slaughtered because they were Jews was fueled by centuries of Christian hatred. I know of nothing --AND I DON'T WANT TO KNOW OF ANYTHING -- that Islam has done that approaches the magnitude of that crime

Dear SPQR,

One way of arguing is putting words in other people's mouths. Sure I am most aware of what the atrocious things that Islam has inspired people to do. However, it is much easier to damn the other whoever the other is than to look at oneself.

The New Testament has some pertinent words to that effect:

Matthew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

It is much easier to damn Islam than to look at oneself and what the group that one belongs to is responsible for.

davids quote..<<..Matthew 7:3 And why beholdest thou the mote[error]..that is in thy brother's eye,

but considerest not the beam..[bile]..that is..[obscuring..in thine own eye?..

..It is much easier to damn..Islam..than to look at oneself
and..what the group..that one belongs to..is responsible for.>>..

yes david..is correctly pointing out..we see the errors..of other
[by the inspiration..of herd mind/..ergo/..

which..perverts..our..own ego-[herd]/mind-bias..]

how do..i decide..what..of the heart[heard-mind]
from that..from the herd-mind..[ego]..?
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040&page=0#176858

[its sort..of..a guide
for..our worlds leaders..];[and their shillzz]

that..what they..[we]..do to..us/
me and you..them..or..just-us..they do to..god..and jesus..too.

DavidF

<<why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?>>

Your initial proposition was:
<<I know of nothing that Islam has done that approaches the magnitude of [Jewish holocaust --which was --"fueled by centuries of Christian hatred"].

Clearly you weren't in any way reticent about pointing out the mote in the eye --or the blame due to -- your "brother" Christians!

But when someone, in response to your challenge, points out an event on a scale much greater than the Jewish holocaust-- fuelled by centuries of Islamic hatred -- you suddenly get coy!

Fascinating!

I've just come across an article whose author presents
another perspective to this discussion,
one that may be also be worth considering:

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/multicultural/grassroots/muslim-community-in-australia.pdf

The Conclusion of this article tells us that:

"Muslim-Australians from different national and ethnic backgrounds
brought their own versions of religious and cultural traditions,
making them a very heterogeneous group in Australia."

"The assumption that Muslim-Australians are an un-integrated group
of people and therefore need to be integrated into the larger
Australian society through government programs and policy
is only partially true."

In the opinion of the article's author: -

"The Muslim integration issue is directly linked to their
social and economic marginalisation from broader Australian
society. In other words, Muslim integration or lack thereof,
has a lot to do with the levels of racism and discrimination
that still exist in Australian society."

In the opinion of the article's author, "It is the social
and economic marginalisation not the religious or
cultural values that preclude Muslim-Australians from
integrating into Australian society."

The author states, "Affected by a multiplicity of poor
social and economic conditions, Muslim-Australians find a
sense of belonging and self worth within their own
communities. Unlike the larger Australian society, these
ethnic and parochial communities provide Muslim people
an anchorage and identity."

One wonders if some Muslims dress differently to most Australians because they have become marginalized or is it to marginalize themselves?

Dear Foxy,
I think that article is correct. However, I would like to further comment. There are certain cultural and religious constraints within certain groups which make it extremely difficult to get to know them let alone form a friendship. Again I am referring to the particular fundamentalists who impose the burka on their womenfolk. Just meeting for coffee in town is impossible. Inviting these women into one's home is fraught with difficulties. I really don't know what the solution is.

pro-mise/quote,,<<..One wonders if some Muslims dress differently
to most Australians because they have become marginalized..or is it to marginalize themselves?>>

is/mise..if you recall..the punks..of the eighties
or the rockers..of the sixties...or the hippies or the sharpies..even the po-mise[the bikies..the surfers..the swim team..ALL SELF IDENTIFY..their goup mind think..by how.they..look.

WHAT WE LOOK LIKE..yells out to the world
see i am a bush-man..im a horse norse man..or an indian..lor a muslim

our external..look ..is DETERMINED..by our inne4r being

but it runs more than..that..so much is herd identity..inbred
into..our very being..we truly exclude all other

no where is this more apparent..than..in..the animal
and plant..kingdoms..a tulip..only fertilizes a tulip
and ducks only mate with drakes..and mosquito suck blood

dont let looks like fool you
only guide you..not lead you astray
like some can..only be known..by their smell..or words
but somehow we find that we hated..in other..we hate with-in..our selves.

so my brother..if you wanna wear the habbid..god dont forbid
plonk it upon..ya head..till ya do..we know its just you...just by how you look.

Dear Danielle,

Perhaps we need to look at the reasons as to why
Islamic fundamentalism has intensified at all - especially
at a time when we might expect the societies involved to
be moving forward toward modernisation, rather than
backward toward the traditional basics of religious
doctrine. As sociologists have observed - fundamentalist
revivals, in whatever religion, take place in times
when social changes have led to turmoil, uncertainty,
and the erosion of familiar values. When people find themselves
confused, threatened, or even appalled at changing
conditions. They may see a "return to basics" as a
solution. Also, the solidarity of any community is
enhanced if it perceives a common outside threat.
What the solution to all this is I also don't know.
This problem arises out of specific social and cultural
conditions - all we can hope for is that with time these
conditions will change and in turn influence the
subsequent course of social change within their
communities.

We are a democratic society with restricted social behaviour, and as such conflict with Islamic ideology and theocracy. I write on an Islamic website where Kurdistan and its child brides policy is upheld as acceptable example of social behaviour. For Muslims it justifies Mohamed's taking a six year old Alisha as a bride. This is the type of ideology some Muslims see as legal behaviour because their beloved prophet was sanctioned by Allah to take such a child bride.

Western democratic values will directly conflict with Islamic theocracy that is why they want local shariah laws in their community. We must maintain one law for all Australian citizens; no matter their culture or religion.

Danielle, "Don't temporary migrant workers receive the same award rates as others? I would have thought that the unions would want this."

If you Google a bit you will find a lot of concerns that temporary migrant workers may not be accorded the Award conditions and there are persistent claims from unions that Aussie workers are displaced to 'restructure' to employ temporary migrant workers in fewer positions in a casualised workforce where work conditions have been warped severely. That can extend from larger employers who find ways to get rid of middle aged staff who have (say) sick leave they have not used, prudently keeping it for the conditions that come with age and stress, to small employers, often ethnics themselves, who employ under workshop conditions.

Foxy,

While you are back-pedalling since I pulled you up on social, employment and immigration laws and on obvious social justice issues, you nonetheless did quote with great relish what you strongly implied to be temporary migrant workers doing work that Australians would not do for the low pay, or could not do because Aussies were inferior somehow.

If what you appear to be alleging you were informed by your senior management source of that large health employer has any truth, it may have some explaining to do.

The record is there for any to go back on.

OUG,

My personal preference is for the kilt, a mode of dress that has much to recommend it albeit with some disadvantages.

otb,

David F., put it so beautifully on this thread when he
wrote- "one way of arguing is putting words
in other people's mouths..."

Dear Danielle,

Here is an article that may be of interest it's by Aftab Malik
who had a 3 month stay in Lakemba, Sydney. He's from the UK
and was invited by the Lebanese Muslim Association to speak
at their "Contextualising Australian Muslims" summit. He
was part of a program that was involved in teaching Islam
in a manner that made sense to them living as Muslims in
Australia in the 21st Century.

The title of the article as you will see is "Familiar Problems
in Lakemba: Reflections of a British Muslim." It makes for
interesting reading.

His underlying message was:

1) Muslims need to be merciful to themselves and others.
2) Knowledge about Islam had to be taken from authoritative
individuals and not autodidacts.
3) Shariah (Islamic Law) is not a static force, but something
that is fluid and dynamic as those interpreting it.
4) Religious extremism (or zealots) has no place in the faith
and it needed to be rejected.

However, he did admit that delivering these messages wasn't
always easy. Still, perhaps there is hope that change can
occur through moderate influences such as this person of
influence.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/07/16/3803980.htm

ahh..for the freedom..of the kilt
[my burden..are wooden shoes]

sure they kept my ancestors feet dry..
but..they..just arnt good for sneaking up with

they are called clompen..cause thats
the sound..they make when..im wearing them..

yet the grand-kiddies so love the noise
its all..just dress-up..thats how we face the world
its our differences..we honor..but our sameness we miss.

Foxy, <David F., put it so beautifully on this thread when he wrote- "one way of arguing is putting words in other people's mouths...">

Which is precisely what you are doing by implying that his comments were to support you.

Previously you dropped Belly's name as well. Hope he likes being associated with you applauding low wages for temporary migrant workers. We should be thankful temporary migrant workers are prepared to work for those low wages you said, not caring a jot about their rights until I reminded you, and displaying your dismissive 'I'm alright, Jack' attitude to the hundreds of nurse graduates who can't get jobs and will lose their hard-won nursing registrations.

Your original comment was directed at blaming Abbott, when it was done under the watch of the Labor/Greens governments with PMs Kevin Rudd and your much adored Julia Whatshername at the helm. Any wonder traditional Labor people despair the rise of that pair, although Julia Whatshername would have been the worst PM by far, ever.

otb,

May I politely suggest that you Google for yourself
The Aged Care Workforce, 2012 Final Report - put out
by the Department of Health. It might clarify things
for you.

As for the rest of your attempts at stirring and personal
attacks on me (nothing new there) - go back
and re-read my posts and show me precisely where
I stated anything against non-migrant workers.
And where I've said anything derogatory about non-
migrant staff and shown my lack of concern.

As for Mr Abbott's axe - have you not been watching
Question Time in Parliament - or watched nurses
complaining about cut-backs and staff shortages?

You really are a nasty piece of work!

Foxy,

You would say that, but the record is there in the thread. I reckon you gave enough to show your prejudices, in particular your lack of concern for the future and conditions of Australian nurses. Although you are on the back-pedal, which you should be.

What you are at pains to forget is that the aging of the Australian population comes as no surprise. It has been in the news for fifty years and more. You would very much prefer that the recent poor planning and policies of the long years of Rudd and Julia Whatshername be forgotten.

Everyone knows that subjects such as gerontology are given scant attention in medical training, and that workers in the field are traditionally poorly encouraged, poorly paid and poor resourced compared with the 'sexy' pursuits such as coronary care and intensive care. Not that an egocentric, wagon-riding PM like Julia Whatshername would care - she said that the elderly don't vote Labor anyhow and didn't deserve an increase in pension(!).

What is at issue and I have pointed to it previously is the poor planning and lack of accountability of federal governments. It hasn't just happened with Abbott as you suggest. Regrettably, neither side of government has adequately supported medical and nursing training, preferring to make up the numbers from South Africa and Asia. There is money too in having far fewer places for our intending medical students, reserving the places to earn $$ from international students. That can include restricting the number of places for Australian medical graduates in teaching hospitals through deals with universities (who get $$ from international students).

You also disregard the long campaign to improve nurse education, recognition and pay. Traditionally, those attracted to nursing are earnest individuals whose life aim is to provide a service to the community. Nurses have always regarded nursing as a vocation and as a profession. The adequate education, pay and conditions have been very hard fought. It had to be strikes, where the rest of the labour movement could get away with limitations and negotiation.

otb,

Goodness me - the litany goes on against me.
And it's wrong. I am being accused of things
that I neither think nor feel. But what can
I do? There are some individuals who apparently
enjoy winding up people. They sit in front of their
computers and hide behind their anonymity and make
deliberately provocative statements to get a response.

Perhaps this short ditty may get my message across
nothing else seems to have worked:

"Poor 'on the beach'
He's out at sea
Continually spreading negativity
If only he could change his pace
And contribute something to the human race."

Foxy,

You could write a ditty for the AN&MF who are feeling despondent about lack of jobs for nursing graduates and the likelihood of forced redundancies for the high numbers of experienced nurses aged 35-45 years.

However you are doing OK, right? You are alright, Jack!

Foxy's view:
"The current health care agencies due to Mr Abbott's axe cuts probably could not afford to hire the "white" staff you speak of.
We need to be grateful that we have caring people who are able to work for lower wages and yet still maintain the care necessary,
especially in our aged care facilities"

and

Foxy, "I was merely quoting what I had been told by the Director of Nursing at two Blu-Cross aged-care facilities here in Melbourne. They hired migrant staff because they were cheaper - and excellent. And this is straight from the "horses -mouth."

otb,

I could write an entire article on behalf of all the
staff in our hospitals, medical centres, and
aged care facilites.
They need all the support that all of us can muster.
The reasons for what's happening in the health-care
sectors are many and complex. I merely touched on a very
small area. If you're really interested in this
subject and the complexity of the problems involved
do go and Google
"The Aged Care Workforce 2012 Final Report" put out by
the Department of Health

cont'd ...

As for your asking me how am I doing?
And whether I'm allright, Jack?

All I can say to you Sir, is -

Take an intelligent guess.

otb,

I see you're at it again.

Gotcha little focus on one of the ladies here -and having yer go : )

Let's take a peek.

............

"Foxy's remarks are still wrong and offensive on two counts."

"First, Foxy was obviously partisan and wrong to claim..."

"Secondly, Foxy was condescending and wrong (her cultural cringe again) to accept and repeat that the Muslim nurses are somehow better and accept lower pay than her disliked 'whites', who apparently are not as good according to Foxy's preferred anecdotal source and expect Award conditions (shock, horror!)."

"Just adding to the last, Foxy might welcome the lower nursing pay and conditions through immigration of Asian nurses, saying,

"We need to be grateful that we have caring people who are able to work for lower wages..""

"Foxy,

Why do you think it is OK to pay temporary migrant workers less?"

"Foxy, <David F., put it so beautifully on this thread when he wrote- "one way of arguing is putting words in other people's mouths...">

Which is precisely what you are doing by implying that his comments were to support you.

Previously you dropped Belly's name as well. Hope he likes being associated with you applauding low wages for temporary migrant workers....."

"Foxy,

You would say that, but the record is there in the thread. I reckon you gave enough to show your prejudices, in particular your lack of concern for the future and conditions of Australian nurses. Although you are on the back-pedal, which you should be."

...............

I'm always interested, otb, in your apparent need to demonise your target woman of the moment on OLO.

You've taken Foxy's words and construed the worst possible sentiment from them.

Why do you do that?

You've done it to me a few times - and it is the lowest form of debating there is.

Human society functions on a cultural ideal or acceptable person and laws are formed to give boundaries to that ideal or what is acceptable. For example Christians follow the character and words of Christ, Buddhists follow the character and words of Buddha and so it is natural that Muslims will follow the character and words of Mohamed.

An examination of their lives will reveal what is expected within the culture. The society that has no character ideal will be in chaos and multicultural values will bring conflict even if some within the culture want reform.

Society needs an ideal character to admire and to aspire to achieve likeness. Today we are being fed chaff characters that breed human conflict.

Poirot,

The site already has a moderator. Your services are not required.

BTT

OTB having answered your usual in another thread I have a question for you.
Are you aware while my rejection of you may be sharper, it is not the only one you quarrel with constantly?
Are you male, and are you OK with your sexuality, seems not.
We can not ignore the length of this thread, Rechtub also holds the record for our longest thread,basically the same subject.
Do we gather from that We if no one else have much to say about Muslims in Australia?
How can we bury the thoughts of those who think differently?
Should we try?
NO we should not it has to be seen not every Muslim is other than a great addition to our country.
Now thin ice is under my feet, but lets try, to say what I think is true.
*No past group of Migrants ever gave reasons to fear for our own culture and safety*
And if we look at the International troubles it seems folk with only a religion based education are more likely to be a concern.
NOW! well we teach our kids about Evolution and most believe in it, fewer every year practice a religion.
So while we can not ban it why do we let any religion be tax free and make too big an impact on our world?
Westerners now know after world wide child molestation Churches are not always Holy.
Why not take every faith out of politics.

I am not easily baited, Belly.

Try someone else.

belly

you can try to lead a beach-bum..to..the water
but you cant make em think..[their only on..the beach..to hound the chicks]..

i..find they..are so much..like sand

it flows in..un-awares
then slowly does its grating/mono-thinking
wearing down..its gritty..gist..on*to..its target sex

[its usually related..to one..or more EX-mrs..Xbum
but most-ly..related..to..issues..with..mumsy*
or more rarely sister obsession/
or auntie issues.

but mosstly..just misogynistic closet gays

this type becomes..what they yearn for

boobs..[in the singularity]
boobies..ina cluster.

Aha! - BTT - the cry of the poster who has been called out for displaying "interesting" tactics.

otb,

Graham expects us to self-moderate for the most part. He doesn't read every thread and has no wish to mollycoddle us.

Your habit of choosing a target and twisting that poster's meaning and misrepresenting their intentions is almost legend around here - and always directed at women.

That sort of bullying "gets right up my nose".

By all means get BTT, but try and exercise some fair play.

34 pages and not one relevant post from you, Poirot.

BTT, Start here,

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6098&page=1

otb,

It's always relevant to stand up to posters who twist meaning and misrepresent the views of others.

I understand that you don't like being stopped in your tracks when you're in full flight.

But them's the breaks.

Dear Poirot,

You can't expect a different form of behaviour from
a person who's only interested in baiting and condemnation.
At the advice of my family - it's best
not to read the posts or respond to them.

Poirot,

You have been on this site for years and obviously have refined your seagull game of blowing in late in threads and diverting them to get attention for yourself. Your arrival heralds the death of threads.

Every thread cannot be about you.

BTT

"Poirot,

You have been on this site for years and obviously have refined your seagull game of blowing in late in threads and diverting them to get attention for yourself. Your arrival heralds the death of threads."

Au contraire, otb, the "attention" is all yours.

You can squeal "diversion" all you like.

You continue to misrepresent posters to bolster your argument and demonise them, and I'll continue to "blow in" and land on your patch.

OTB how many sites have you been bared from.
Ever been called a troll?
Name a poster here you have not had troubles with.
Any thoughts come from this.

Belly, I see you want a double tax on members of religion. Honest members of religion already pay their taxes.

You are as bad as Muslims who want tax from non members of their faith. Double standards!

Gatherings of members of a religion i.e. Churches, Mosques etc are merely members of community with a common faith. They have no income other than what they have already paid tax on. You do not have a case.

If Churches have common asset upon which they have income they already pay tax upon that income after expenses but you will find They are not for profit organisations. My wife worked in a Church run O.H.S.C and she was responsible for paying wages to staff and their taxes to government.

I suggest you audit the books of a Church near you to see if they should pay taxes. Upon what should they pay tax?

Whatever your world view is obviously it is a mishmash of negative ideas. Ask yourself, "What contribution have I made to society that has improved the lives of people in my community?"

I respect Belly's work for the workingman in the context of the union movement. I think he has done more to improve the lot of the average Australian than Cardinal Pell and other religious leaders who have engaged in covering up the misdeeds of their institutions rather than addressing the concerns of the victims.

Ah! Yes, let us tax the churches, particularly the Catholic Church, arguably the largest charitable organization in the world.

Never mind the world though, they're probably the largest charitable organization in Australia.

Shut them down and listen to the howls as general taxatidn goes up to fill the void.

Anyone remember what happened when Archbishop Eris O'Brien, through his deputy Bishop John Cullinane, closed the Catholic schools in Goulburn, NSW?

Dear Belly,

You asked about thoughts?

Remember - "Grunter: the story of a pig with ATTITUDE!"

I'll just remind you:

There once was a small green farm, with a large pink problem.
His name was Granville, but he was known as Grunter because
that's what he does! Grunt, Grunt.

He hates everything and everyone. He's overfed, and
overweight. He's mad, bad, angry, and sad (and dangerous to
know on days with a 'd'). He has serious attitude
and shocking wind.

Yesterday he flattened the farmer, spat on the cat,
dunked the dog, catapulted the cow, and mashed
three-short-sighted mice into the mud.

The day before, he bit the badger, grabbed the goat
and choked the chicks with one of his outbursts.
He ran amok in the mud, sat on the sheep, and dropped
something dirty on the duck.

The other animals think that he's too big for his trotters.
They think that he should be taught a lesson.

Then came Grunter's birthday. And he was all alone.
No one remembered?
Or did they?

BOOM!
An explosion echoed in the farm.
Grunter was last seen flying into outer-space.

And the pink problem was no more.

The moral of that story for children is -
Don't be a Grunter, be nice,
It's an explosive book to discover -
how not to treat your fellow man, or pig!

Bears thinking about.

Foxy Foxy Foxy mate!
It was a dark and stormy night, the news on the radio said some unknown bloke had written a book.
Some thought the book rude to a bloke who may or may not have ever lived, from a land far away from ours.
The streets filled with folk dressed like Darlects from Doctor who, and their children.
Our for a walk/riot and to tell us infidels we are bound for hell.
Little rug rats with nice clean smiling faces held up signs warning us they thought our heads should be removed.
Our task is the pretend it never happened.
And will never happen again.
We too must pretend we are not concerned and have nothing to fear.
Unfortunately my fairy story came true, more than once in many country,s

Dear Belly,

Our hope in this country lies with the younger
generations and with moderate teachers like
Aftab Malik who teaches Islam in a manner that
makes sense to them living as Muslims in
Australia in the 21st Century.

His underlying message is that religious extremism (or
zealots) has no place in the faith and it needed to be
rejected.

More teachers like him are needed to deliver this sort
of message.

Foxy,
It would be nice if all Muslims were like Aftab Malik but he is a minority in ideas as he tries to adapt Islam to democratic ideas. But be sure most Muslims despise Western society and loose attitudes. They want to change the West not let the West change them. Look to Indonesia do they want to change Australia or do they want to be like Australia.

Dear Josephus,

I value your opinion. We've had some interesting
discussions in the past and you always put a
different perspective onto issues.
All I can say in this particular case is that
I prefer to be more optimistic (call me naive)
and hope that the future generations will differ
from some of the radical influences that may bear
down on them. Education is the key.

Foxy, "Education is the key"

Specifically, what education would that be?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/columnists/article-2430179/MANZOOR-MOGHAL-Veils-segregated-schools-risk-sowing-seeds-Islamic-terror-Britain.html

otb,

What education would that be, you ask?

Haven't you been reading my posts?

I'm referring of course to moderate
Muslim teachers like Aftab Malik who was invited
by the Lebanese Muslim Association to speak at
its "Contextualising Australian Muslims" summit.

I posted all this information earlier to Danielle,
but I'm happy to repeat it here for your information,
seeing as you asked.

Aftab Malik spent 3 months in Lakemba, Sydney. He's
a British Muslim teacher and he wrote several articles,
"Familiar Problems in Lakemba: Reflections of a
British Muslim." As I stated earlier his underlying
message was that religious extremism (or zealots) have
no place in the faith and needed to be rejected.
His message is teaching Islam in a manner that makes
sense to them living as Muslims in Australia in the 21st
Century.

Education by moderate teachers such as Aftab Malik is what
I am talking about.

The following link may help:

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/07/16/3803980.htm

Foxy,

Again I ask, "Specifically what education?".

Or do you imagine that the UK and other European countries are completely stupid and haven't done their earnest best to encourage 'moderate' Islam and enlightened education?

otb,

I am a bit puzzled that you don't understand
the point being made regarding the importance
of moderation in the education of young Muslims,
Like the type preached by Aftab Malik in the
link I cited earlier. Did you not read the link
I gave, or are you now merely stirring?

Anyway, I shall repeat:

Aftab Malik is a teacher who's teaching Muslims the following -
underlying message:

1) Muslims need to be merciful to themselves and others.

2) Knowledge about Islam had to be taken from
authoritative individuals and not autodidacts.

3) Shariah (Islamic Law) is not a static force, but
something that is fluent and dynamic as those interpreting it.

4) Religious extremism (or zealots) has no place in the
faith and it needed to be rejected.

This is the type of education by moderate teachers like
Malik that is needed.

Foxy,

What's Malik's teaching on monogamy?

I can't find it.

we conveniently ignore that the 9/11 bombers were highly educated in America. One day we will stop being dumb enough to believe that education can change a rotton corrupt heart.

Foxy, "This is the type of education by moderate teachers like Malik that is needed"

I am not puzzled that you arrogantly believe that you have the 'solution' that continues to evade authorities in the UK and Europe.

I say good on Malik and there should be many more like him, but the combined years of experience of the UK and Europe does not support your contention that the solution lies in State education alone. That cannot replace what is taught in the home, for starters.

I am reminded too of your belief as expressed before in other threads that much if not the lion's share of the 'education' you speak of should be directed at the population of the host/adoptive country.l Because you direct the lion's share, if not all of the blame onto the host country's own citizens, alleging 'racism'. You have no concern for importing noxious traditions and cultural practices, believing too that all will be good citizens in a generation if not immediately.

'Good citizens' as you would define them though, for you believe they should be changing and displacing the inherited Australian culture and traditions, and most likely laws and system of government as well.

The violent offenders that the police are able to arrest through breaking the cultural wall of silence are in your world not really responsible for their foul deeds either, being somehow 'made' to do it through what you foolishly believe to be the treatment they receive from the host country's citizens.

Now you can go right ahead and claim to be misrepresented, but these are attitudes, rather the prejudices you consistently direct at your fellow Australians, who contrary to your dim view of them have excelled in the world since WW2 in taking in migrants and displaced persons, and giving them immediate, equal entitlements to all welfare. health benefits and the like.Added to that, preferential treatment for jobs in the public services for instance. But you never give Aussies credit for any of it, preferring to sledge them at every opportunity.

Again, specifically what 'education' are you really talking about?

otb,

I can see that you are having a great deal of
difficulty in understanding the point that I
am trying to make. The education that I am
referring to is the one that is given by
Islamic scholars to their communities.
Therefore the point being made is that
moderate Islamic scholars like Malik are needed.
I am not suggesting anything else.

As for the specifics? - I've already stated a few of Malik's
messages from his first lecture. Below are the second and
third (and final) of his lecture series, from Sydney.
Perhaps after reading the lectures you will have a
better understanding of what I am trying to say.
If not, then I can't do any more for you. Your comprehension is
not something over which I have any control.

Dear Is Mise,

I don't know what Malik's stand is on polygamy.
I did not attend any of his lectures, nor am I an expert
on the Islamic scholar. I can only speak on the impression
that I got from his lecture series as given on the web.
And he strikes me as a moderate. It may help for you to read
the links I've given - and you could perhaps make up your
own mind on what it would be.

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/08/05/3818249.htm

And -

http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2013/08/29/3836721.htm

onthebeach,
The fact is that Muslim schools are religiously exclusive. When they open a school they employ Christian teachers [as in Western Sydney} but once the school is established and has its accreditation they reduce the Christian teachers and employ Muslim Arabic speaking teachers. I had Christian friends working in a school in Western Sydney and as the Christian teachers left, the outdoor activity curriculum was reduced and the religious learning of the Koran was increased. These were supposedly moderate Muslims.

Foxy,

As the poster who once claimed that Year 12 school students and their annual coastal high-jinks were in fact responsible for violence far worse and above the violence that police said was the work of ethnic criminal gangs that are taking over OMG bikie gangs, I don't even put much stock in what you claim. You are forever cherry-picking anyhow.

While it is refreshing that a Malik exists and good on him, what do you say prevents his solution from working in the UK and Europe? He is a visiting 'expert' (so say the media anyhow) but what about the UK form whence he comes and the UK's partners in Europe? Why haven't his ideas been adopted there, or if they have, which is very much on the cards, why doesn't the education you say he believes is 'The Cure', work?

I notice you refuse to direct your attention to the obvious challenges to your opinion, preferring to broken record, as usual. If I continue trying to get you to answer a question, you will get all bent out of shape and it will be more of your trademark frivolous rude snipes - as is occurring to posters on other threads ATM, eg runner, where you are levelling childish and noxious allegations about his relations with his mother and wife. Just because he disagrees with you!

Now that the voters have put out the rubbish in Canberra, hopefully a fresh approach might come to terms with the simple, incontrovertible truth that the federal government has been importing problems and violence. That comes down to screening, which has often been at fault before. An example being the sentimental idiot Malcolm Fraser, who against the advice of his own immigration and foreign affairs officials, imported a problem that continues to grow in Sydney.

otb,

It appears that I was under a
false impression in thinking that we could
have a reasoned, intelligent discussion.
(Because nobody likes or supports an abusive,
illogical debater).
But I was wrong - so I shall move on and leave you
to fizz and sputter in your own grease

A challenge to Western apologists (Google the term):
In Australia, provided we follow the law of the land,

*We have as much lawful right to reject a religion as to follow it
*We have as much lawful right to reject a marriage as to accept it
*We have as much lawful right to disobey rules of personal behaviour as to obey them
*We have as much lawful right to slight a “prophet” as to “pbuh” him
*We have as much lawful right to associate with people we choose as to avoid them

Does the education in Australian Madrassas instil those rights? Do “moderate” Moslem educators do so? Does Aftab Malik? If these Enlightenment values art standard fare for Moslem pupils, we can see Australian Islam being a beacon for freedom for apostasy, blasphemy, impiety, freedom of association and assembly and speech, and an end to forced marriages and women having to get about in body bags.

But Foxy’s list of the four vaguely identified principles is wide open to taqiyya (Google it) and doesn’t touch on the widespread belief (I’d call it fact) that the bridge-head given to Islam is a force against the human liberty that we’ve a right to take for granted.

But I wouldn’t ban Islam – merely crack down hard on every call to enforce its theocratic rules

Dear Emperor Julian,

Please read the three links I have given on Malik's
3 lectures. It may clarify a great deal on what
moderate Islamic Scholars like Malik believe and
try to teach, and what they think of Muslim extremists
who give every Muslim a bad name. The problem is
that the moderates don't as a rule get as much
publicity as the extremists.
I agree with you 100 per cent,
those that break our laws should be punished.

There are deep splits between Muslim groups in Australia.

"The mainly moderate Bosnian Australian community refused to accept the fundamentalist Taj El-Din Hilaly (an Arab born in Egypt) as Australia's mufti. Victorian Imams do not recognise Hilaly. Hilaly, who supports terrorism and the Islamic conquest of the entire world." (Wiki)

Unfortunately, the Lakemba mosque has not been served well by some religious teachers, Hilaly being one. Many "lessons" and propaganda will have to be "un-taught." Hopefully, this is possible.

Aftab Malik is indeed a worthy Muslim.

However, the message he is teaching indicate the problems he has encountered.

1) Muslims need to be merciful to themselves and others.

2) Knowledge about Islam had to be taken from authoritative individuals and not autodidacts.

3) Shariah (Islamic Law) is not a static force, but something that is fluent and dynamic as those interpreting it.

4) Religious extremism (or zealots) has no place in the faith and it needed to be rejected.

Foxy,

As is my common practice, I choose to ignore your rudeness directed at me. However it is pleasing that my post has encouraged you to back-pedal on your sledging of runner. You still made the offensive remark about his mother and wife in the first place and it was irrelevant, unnecessary and spiteful.

You keep avoiding the questions I have put to you, preferring to blame what you allege to be unfair publicity - that you claim doesn't recognise what 'moderates' do. How you imagine that explains the violence in Sydney, or the ethnic criminal take-over of OMG bikies gangs goodness only knows, or the violence in the UK and Europe. However you probably excuse wrong-doers for their behaviour anyway, postulating it is ultimately all society's fault. 'Educate' society, eh Foxy?

While the public perception of violence and terrorism is affected by the reporting of offences, and doubtless you would like censorship that doesn't mention ethnicity of offenders sought by police, none of that explains why some are more implicated in crime and specifically, violence.

While I do not suggest bans, I repeat what I said that the federal government has not done its job in screening migrants and I gave the example of a very stupid decision of Liberal PM,Malcolm Fraser. My comment regarding poor screening certainly includes the economic migrants who arrive courtesy of the criminal gangs involved in people smuggling.

otb,

What about your rudeness directed at me?
Your consistent personal attacks?
Your putting words into my mouth and then
attacking me for them?
Your making statements with the sole intention
of getting a response?
Your troll-like behaviour that never ceases?
And the list goes on.

How many people have pointed out your atrocious double-
standards of picking on women and letting the men on
not a word about some of the atrocious comments from
the males on this forum. Talk about cherry-picking
and being selective in what you choose to pick on and
what you choose to ignore.

As for runner, don't flatter yourself.
All I did was respond to his nasty and inappropriate
comment of -

"...measure everything by the untrustworthy, slimy, feminist
government, of the last 5 years..."

asking him why he seemed to have such a negative attitude
towards women. You did not pull him up on his comment
perhaps it agreed with your take on things.

I have no further wish to interact with you and I would
appreciate it if you did not address me in your posts.
Find someone else to bait and condemn.

Foxy,

The point is that you broken record and where that doesn't work you divert the thread. A flurry of posts to bury any opinion or question you don't like.

Now what about some answers to those questions I put to you? See here,

<You keep avoiding the questions I have put to you, preferring to blame what you allege to be unfair publicity - that you claim doesn't recognise what 'moderates' do. How you imagine that explains the violence in Sydney, or the ethnic criminal take-over of OMG bikies gangs goodness only knows, or the violence in the UK and Europe. However you probably excuse wrong-doers for their behaviour anyway, postulating it is ultimately all society's fault. 'Educate' society, eh Foxy?

While the public perception of violence and terrorism is affected by the reporting of offences, and doubtless you would like censorship that doesn't mention ethnicity of offenders sought by police, none of that explains why some are more implicated in crime and specifically, violence.

While I do not suggest bans, I repeat what I said that the federal government has not done its job in screening migrants and I gave the example of a very stupid decision of Liberal PM,Malcolm Fraser. My comment regarding poor screening certainly includes the economic migrants who arrive courtesy of the criminal gangs involved in people smuggling>
Posted by onthebeach, Tuesday, 26 November 2013 8:40:45 PM

david f "I am not just talking about citizenship. I am talking about humanity."

You referred to "an *Australian* of any blah, blah, blah"
Not a "human", an "Australian".
"Australians" can only mean two things: (a) citizens of Australia, or (b) the ethnic group "Australians", who have always been White.

"Apparently you would reject a person whose skin colour, religion or ethnicity doesn't match yours."

I question them entering our country and changing the population.
I don't "reject" who they are intrinsically.

There nothing "wrong" with being Turkish in Turkey or Malay in Malaysia.
But that's not the issue.
They're moving *here*, out of their own context and into ours.
That's what I "reject".

Is Mise "don't you find it inconvenient that so many English and other European people have Negroid ancestors?"

No genuine European is Negroid.
Are you referring to the Mitochondrial Eve?
That was a looooong time ago.
And the ancient first humans were not the Negroids of today.

Indic and Iranian people are historically related to Europeans, but 6000 years of separation means their cultures bear almost no resemblance to ours.

How more so ancestors with 60,000 years distance?

Sharing ancient ancestors is meaningless.
Many of the modern peoples/cultures of today are only a few centuries old.

IF..YOU BAN..RELIGION...[NOW*]
this is what you will miss

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium_en.html

i do it this way
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040&page=0#176858

you do it your way
[all ways lead to..god]
the great thing..is no-one is ALL..right..NOR ALL/wrong

great/evil..is made/better/wiser..
yet..kit is the greater..good..that ends it*

and we only..KNOW..there is a problem
[by talking..about it..a problem..shared..is a problem halved

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6040#177111

it would..be nice
if you could...join-in
even critique..this discussion...thread..guys

on..the joy*
we share..with/our..brothers
if no one replies..then what..?

what..your fightend?

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6119&page=0

please..pick..up/on..the flow
look at it as a sign..speak..on your own thread..or mine

lets get it right..[this isnt about zionists
yet it might be about zion]..where were you daddy..before the messiah..didst come?

the watchmen..awake*
what..says the small..scroll.

*ITS/TIME*[this time]..now*

Shokadelic,

No need to go back 60,000 years.
The Romans recruited from all over the Empire but were loathe to employ soldiers in their native areas so British recruits could serve in Africa and vice versa. When their time was served these soldiers could opt for home or stay and, human nature being what it is, some of them already had families, having paired off with local women.

"The finding suggests that black people have contributed to the "indigenous" British gene pool....Africans were first recorded in England some 1,800 years ago, part of a Roman garrison defending Hadrian's Wall against raids by tribes in what is now Scotland.

But slaves from West Africa....likely source of the African DNA revealed in the study.

"The first....slaves showed up in 1555....and....from that time on their numbers increased," ....In 1601 Elizabeth I issued an edict "that black people should be expelled from Britain because there were too many of them around, which everybody ignored,"....Historian Ron Ramdin, author of Reimaging Britain: 500 Years of Black and Asian History, said that by the end of the 18th century an estimated 10,000 black people were living in Britain, mostly concentrated in cities.....The University of Leicester's Jobling concedes that African DNA probably exists "at a very low level" in the native British gene pool. But, he said, the latest findings show that "what it means to be British is complicated and always has been."
See <http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/pathways/blackhistory/early_times/elizabeth.htm

Mark Thomas, from the Centre for Genetic Anthropology, University College London, said other Y-chromosome lineages in Britain from the last 1,000 to 2,000 years probably also have an African origin.

"For example, there's a lineage that's very common in North Wales that's usually found in places like North Africa and Ethiopia," he said.

The new study, Thomas added, "makes the point that we do all have very mixed ancestry."

See <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/070124-british-genes_2.html>

One of the foremost comments on this site mentioned Muslim gangs. I was curious to know more about them and also how they were regarded by the Islamic community. Googling away, I found Muslimvillage.com which covers bibs'n'bobs of topics of interest to Muslims. As this site originates in Sydney, any discussions and comments seemed very apros pro to what we have been discussing. The site is directed to, and is responded to by, I would think the average Muslim.

For those who are interested, I would recommend reading the topic "Religious divide drives bikie war" and also the readers' comments.

I do not wish to influence others opinions, so would like a writer or two here to casually look at the site - some of the topics, forums, and comments by their readers, and with disinterest give an opinion of what the general readership are like.

http://muslimvillage.com/2013/11/03/45301/overcoming-historical-amnesia-muslim-contributions-civilization/

Malala’s quest for universal education follows in Muslims’ long and proud history in the field of education. Two Muslim women, Fatima and Miriam al-Firhi, created the world’s first university, Al-Qarawiyyin in Fez, Morocco, in 859 AD. For several years, students were schooled here in a plethora of secular and religious subjects.

At the end of their education, teachers evaluated students and awarded degrees based on satisfactory performances. The concept of awarding degrees would spread from Fez to Andalucía, Space, and later to the Universities of Bologna in Italy and Oxford in England, among other places of learning.

Spanish Muslims of Andalucía were especially strong advocates of education and helped to dispel the gloom that had enveloped Europe during the Dark Ages. Between the 8th and 15th centuries, Andalucía was perhaps the world’s epicenter for education and knowledge.

Spanish universities such as those in Cordoba, Granada, and Seville, had Christian and Jewish students who learned science from Muslims. Women were also encouraged to study in Muslim Spain.

This educational environment that stressed tolerance would not reach the “Western world” until the 19th and 20th centuries.

http://www.hadithoftheday.com/

Today’s Beautiful Hadith is about Kindness

Reported by Aishah (RA): The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Kindness is not to be found in anything, but that it adds to its beauty; and it is not withdrawn from anything, but it makes it defective.” (Muslim)

Re OMG bikies and ethnic gangs, this article quotes the Australian Crime Commission,

http://www.news.com.au/national/bikie-nation-8212-the-outlaw-gangs-in-your-backyard/story-fncynjr2-1226690598400

Is Mise, so your justification for continuing multiracial/multicultural immigration is a history of *slavery* and colonial empire building!

Things you would no doubt condemn in any other context.

"African DNA probably exists "at a very low level" in the native British gene pool"

So wouldn't there likewise be a "very low level" of European DNA among African Negroids.

Does that means millions of Europeans have the "right" to migrate to Africa, increasing their numbers and influence at the expense of natives.

Oh but didn't they do that before? And it was "evil" then, eh?

But it's not "evil" for alien peoples to migrate in the millions to Australia, increasing their numbers and influence at the expense of "Australians" (the ethnic group).
That's not "evil", that's something to celebrate!

To revise rehctub "Do we ban incongruous immigration, or just wait for the inevitable civil war here?"

Shoka,

I guess that it must come as a shock that we 'whites' ain't all white.

Lookup the "Rape of Baltimore" for a more recent infusion of 'non-white'
DNA into a European people.

"It was a lucrative centre of the pilchard fisheries, although Crooke was accused of dabbling in piracy; some went so far as to call Baltimore "a nest of pirates". In 1607 it became a market town, with the right to hold a weekly market and two annual fairs. Control passed after Crooke's death to Sir Walter Coppinger. It was sacked in 1631 by Algerian pirates,[3] and reminders of the incident still exist in the form of pub names, like "The Algiers Inn". More than 100 villagers were sold into slavery, of whom only 2 or 3 ever saw Ireland again."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baltimore,_County_Cork

There were said to be a lot of darker skinned children born 9 months after the raid!

Raids by the corsairs also occurred in England as well as Continental Europe.

Shokadelic wrote "But it's not "evil" for alien peoples to migrate in the millions to Australia, increasing their numbers and influence at the expense of "Australians" (the ethnic group).
That's not "evil", that's something to celebrate!"

Spot on there!

We do indeed celebrate, every 'Australia Day', and it was a good thing that we aliens arrived in 1788.

In http://muslimvillage.com/2013/11/03/45301/overcoming-historical-amnesia-muslim-contributions-civilization/ ,cited by "one under god", Craig Considine spells out the customary sugar coasting presented on behalf of the Moslem cult. He has to dredge back many centuries to find it. The reality of Islam is the bullet fired into the head of Malala Yousafzai and the outpouring of Islamic "blame-the-victim" hatred that continues to follow. Aftab Malik follows the same thread. Espousing the sugar coating to draw attention awey from the reality is an expression of what Islam calls "takiyya" (Google it - interesting).

A related operation of takiyya is to claim the fascist kernel of Islam is really only the opinions of extremists. Alas, one source is loaded to the gills with the opinions of extremists. It's called the Koran. Google the Islamic scholar Ibn Warraq (sensibly an infidel) for what the Koran really says, winkled out from the taqiyya-forest of purpose-cited alternative translations.

Sorry, a correction. I should have added "as Considine" to "Aftab Malik follows the same thread"

Is Mise, first it was slavery and colonialism, now it's Muslim pirates!
You sure have strange bedfellows.

"it was a good thing that we aliens arrived in 1788."

Oh, the irony! Not!

No doubt you condemn that "invasion by aliens", readily acknowledging the tragedy that followed for the displaced natives.

But our *own* displacement is a blessing, we're moving forward!

We can't do anything about the evils of past centuries.

But we *are* responsible for the sociopolitical crimes of our own time.
The destruction of "Australian" people and culture is happening *now*.
We have the power to stop it.