Good afternoon to you STEELEREDUX...

So our attempts at multiculturalism is the envy of the world you say ? Who's world ? I agree there are many nationalities who make superb citizens and integrate quite successfully into our Aussie culture.

These are people originating from far off (earlier on, war-torn) Europe, mostly from a Christian tradition, all of whom possess very similar ideals, aspirations, and expectancy, in fact many of their goals are inextricably linked to those of our own life ambitions - a good education, a job, own home, happy marriage, and a loving family.

Your initial statement would've been more precise had you said, a vast number of Australians like, and have wholly embraced migrants from European countries that observe normal Christian orthodoxy, that is fundamentally true, STEELEREDUX.

However what most Australians don't want, are individuals who originate from Islamic countries, and who bring their insurrectionary Islamism with them; and instead of trying to assimilate into the Australian culture, continue to wholly engage in their primitive barbarism, by blindly following the edicts of their radicalised (backyard) Imam's, in pursuit of their medieval sharia law.

Another matter STEELEREDUX, by employing insulting, offensive, and disparaging language, in order to offend BANJO and others herein, simply because they dare disagree with your somewhat perverted and prejudiced views, is quite deplorable, thus rendering you as an arrogant and imperious individual !

Finally, in your opening paragraph, you demand proof from me ? Then your argument is similarly lamentable, as it has absolutely no basis in fact either ? And your use of the adjective 'demographic' to preface 'lamentable' puzzles me somewhat ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

Peter Costello in his Memoirs outlined some
of the following thoughts:

He describes Australia as a successful
multicultural society. And it is in the sense that
people from all different backgrounds have in the
past lived together in harmony. We have had government
policies from successive governments (and programs
to implement them) that have made our country successful
in this regard, and so very different from the UK and
Europe. However the emphasis has always been that
there is a predominant culture just as there is a
predominant language.

And the political and cultural institutions that govern
Australia are absolutely critical to that attitude of
harmony and tolerance. Costello stresses that
within an institutionalised
framework that preserves tolerance and protects order
we can celebrate and enjoy diversity be it in food,
music, theatre, religion, language, and culture.
However we could not do that without the framework which
guarantees the freedom for all - to enjoy diversity.

Terrorists and radicals - are those who do not
acknowledge the rights and liberties of others. They are
the ones who forfeit the right to join in
Australian citizenship. Their refusal to acknwledge the
rule of law as laid down by our democratic institutions
stabs at the heart of our country. There is one law we are
all expected to abide by. It is the law enacted by the
Australian Parliament under the Australian Constitution.

Thankfully, the majority of Muslims in the country do accept it.
The radicals and extremists are a minority. Worrying yes,
of course, but a minority nevertheless. As David Irvine
(head of ASIO) stated clearly - it would be totally unfair
to blame the majority of Australian Muslims for the actions
of the radical Islamists - who mis-use their religion to
suit their own political ends. As we know - the media
covers their actions because they're newsworthy -
even though they're not typical.

We have a robust tolerance of difference in our society.
But to maintain this tolerance we have to have an agreed
framework which will protect the rights and liberties of all.

Come on, guys, give Steele a break...

When he says "We have a multicultural society that is the envy of the world. It is robust, it works" he means it works for immigrants, specially Muslims.

Muslims come to the West, they bring Mohammed ("I am made victorious with terror") and Allah ("I will strike terror into the hearts of unbelievers") with them and the stupid infidels roll out the red carpet and sing kumbayah.

Our elites -- political, the media, academia, churches, government, etc -- do everything in their power to subvert our culture and civilization. There is no rational explanation for this. I can only think of the old quote "Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make mad" --- we are all mad, as in crazy.

Another name that comes to mind is Enoch Powel -- his "Rivers of Blood" speech may be considered the zero point for all the multicultural madness. They said he was crazy, a racists and his projections and warning were absurd.

Oh yes, lets not talk about Muslims. Instead, lets use call they Pakistanis, Lebanese or whatever. Perry de Havilland (London) says he never… ever… heard a person of Pakistani or Arab origins called ‘Asian’ in the UK other than in the mainstream media. Never. Not even once. His comments about such were deleted by the Guardian, of course. Asian is so deliciously vague -- could be chinese, Indian, Vietnamese, Pakistani, Iranian, Japanese.... After all, they are all practically identical. Hundreds of articles have been written about the tragic Rotherham events, but the words Islam and Muslims almost never appear.

I also think of the dialog about words in Carroll's masterpiece, but instead of meaning different things, words now mean nothing -- to some people, or they are deliberately mislabeled, like writing 'honey' on a bottle of poison.

...
(continued)

The “Islam” problem cannot be resolved because our leaders have their heads in the sand (or sewer). Fact is that “elites” see no evil except if related to Western European civilization.

In its first report on Rotherham, BBC does not mention any ethnicity or religion, just vague statements saying the perpetrators belonged to an ethnic group and identifying them may be racist.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28939089

On Channel 4 News (UK), the ceo of Barnardo’s, Mr Khan, refused to give an answer to a question about the ethnicity involved, saying we should not focus on the identity of the perpetrators because it “distracted attention” from the victims. In another program, Radio 4 held a lively discussion about how jihadists (tired of beheading and massacring people in Iraq) could be “reintegrated” into British society. Cute.

The NYTimes has a problem using the word “evil” with Islamic terror, saying it is ‘seductive’ but counter productive. JamesDawes, on CNN, says using the word evil “stops us from thinking.”
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0826-goldberg-isis-evildoers-20140826-column.html

The FBIs just released 60-page National Threat Assessment for Domestic Extremism, dated Aug14, about activities of domestic extremist movements—feature none motivated by Islam. They include anti-government militia groups, white supremacy extremists, “sovereign citizen” nationalists, and anarchists. One possible explanation for the omission of Islamist extremism in the report is provided in a footnote describing an “other” category of domestic extremism, which includes extremists motivated by beliefs”

The report left out all references to the April 2013 bombing of the Boston Marathon and the 2009 Fort Hood shootings by Nidal “Allahu Akbar” Hasan (officially “workplace violence.”). Rep. Louie Gohmert (R, Texas) said that the FBI was ordered to purge references to Islam, jihad, and Muslims in its counterterrorism lexicon.

It goes on and on. Western leaders are betraying their people, and Muslims pretending they accept our values, sometimes… An Aug. 20 statement signed by more than 60 Australian Muslim community leaders and organizations argues that there was no real terrorist threat: "There is no solid evidence to substantiate this threat. Rather, racist caricatures of Muslims as backwards, prone to violence and inherently problematic are being exploited". Right!

Hello there FOXY...

As always you prosecute your case both concisely and with a great degree of humility. You're also correct in what you say, there are many good, law abiding people who are as Aussie as you and me, and who practice their Muslim faith in a dignified and private fashion. In fact there were several that I knew personally, who were members of NSW Police, and better coppers you'd never meet !

These people have left their former homes, expressly for the purpose of making a new life for themselves and their families. In fact the brother of one of the blokes I've mentioned, has in fact reached a fairly senior level within the AFP, probably because of his outstanding linguistic abilities with certain dialects and specific cultural knowledge of that part of the world.

Generally though, there are many more, who's only objective is to assist their more militant, more manic Imams, in discreetly establishing new Islamic conclaves, all for the express purpose of instituting larger tracts of Islamic dominion. Thereby creating a stronger Muslim ascendancy, over larger more secular areas of those nations that hitherto were considered merely profane and temporal. Not dissimilar to that, of the earlier days of the Sydney suburb of Bankstown and it's environs.

All this has been accomplished for the indisputable purpose of firmly extending the influence of Islam, throughout the entire, morally soiled, Western world. Following which, there will be an inauguration of full sharia law, that would prevail for all time.

With respect FOXY it's here now, in our city of Sydney ? Unfortunately the evidence is irrefutable.

1) For me the term Multiculturalism encompasses the wide range of cultures that make up our current Australian society... Greeks, Italians, English, Scottish, and other post war immigrants as well as those coming from the Middle-East. I don't think it is appropriate to be blaming Multiculturalism for the more recent problems emanating out of the Muslim faith.

2) Be clear, I am all for stopping all future immigration from anyone who declares Islam or Muslim is their religion. We have enough, if not too many already here.

3) I am gobsmacked that no one has questioned the sense in Jay-of-Mebourne's outrages comments: "See I repudiate the belief in a "Holocaust" precisely because it's a belief, an article of faith and as an atheist I cannot accept beliefs at all. Similarly I express an admiration for National Socialism because it stripped away the belief systems of the old world and challenged the German people to look toward the new."

So let me get this right, if someone believes an event happened they are automatically wrong because believing is an 'article of faith' and therefore religious and thus has to be untrue. That's a form crazy logic that I previously would have only credited as possible in Arabia.