Hey Foxy,
I checked out the linked article.
I'm not sure I can articulate my thoughts very well atm on this one.

On face value this kind of article is the type of thing I'm talking about, that annoys me.
Always written from an immigrants point of view promoting the idea 'they' are Australian.
Suddenly 'Muslim' is Australian.

The article talked about what it means to be Australian.
(It would be a good forum topic)

Now if I move to India would I be considered Indian?
If I moved to Mexico would I be considered Mexican?
If I moved to China would I be considered Chinese?

But anyone can be Australian.
It all gets confusing doesn't it.
See how it works in some situations but not in others?
Remember when foreigners thought of Aussies as being like Crocodile Dundee?

The article states that no-one is more Australian than anyone else.
Now my Great Grandfather was apparently promoted to CO on the battlefield at Gallipoli after his CO was shot.

In responding to the statement no-one is more Australian than anyone else I ask what do these people care (immigrants) care about Anzac Day?
It's just a paid day off to them.
Are the sons and daughters of Anzacs more Australian than people who call themselves Australians, but were not even born here?

Not Being Born Here.
Stands to reason they were firstly born a different nationality.
So some foreigner is here for a couple of years thinks he is just as Australian as me, when they weren't even born here and firstly grew up Iranian or Pakistani (for example).

Did they grow up watching The Sullivans, A Country Practice, Sons and Daughters, Prisoner or Mother and Son?
No, they were living in another country learning its ways and customs which they now want to impose in my country.
Seems very much like the opposite of Australian to me.

Dear AC,

I've already articulated my thoughts on this issue
on The Forum. Ages ago I started a Discussion -
"What does being an Australian mean to you?"

I wrote under the name of "Lexi."

It's worth a read:

http://www.forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5971

Hey Foxy,
You seem to be having a terrible time with those links.
I can't understand why they don't work, I'm sure they are right.
Lets try to figure it out...

I'm posting this link as a test which I've already previewed as working, I searched and found the forum link myself and copied the address and pasted it here.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5971

Now I'll copy and paste your link:

http://www.forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5971

Maybe OLO doesn't like linking to web addresses that include the www.

Dear AC.,

Thanks for sorting things out for me.
I am so relieved that it finally works.
Here's another discussion on the Forum
that may interest you:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4258

One of the problems for the news media was the Victorian policy of not
giving information on the ethnicity of offenders.
Indeed they appeared to give very little information at all.
Something similar went on in NSW but I don't think it was an officially
acknowledged policy.

We can be pleased that the policy of saying such offenders had a mental problem
does not seem to have been implemented here.
It is/was very prevalent excuse to cover up racial/religious crimes
in the UK and Europe. It does seem to have worn itself out lately.

Think about it from the politicians point of view.
They authorised this immigration surge and they do not want to be
tarred with the blame for it going wrong.

I'm a bit late coming in here, but what has this got to do with censorship?