Dearest Foxy,

Like Socrates, I know that I know nothing. Thank you for the comparison.

Wouldn't it be a wonderful world if all Indian girls could have the opportunities that Latika and Australian girls - and of course, boys - take for granted. I look forward to the time when all Indians have lifestyles as comfortable as ours, yours and mine, dear Foxy, when they can simply flick a switch and the lights come on, the kettle boils, the stove comes on, there's hot water. They're as entitled as we are to all those comforts, fridges, washing machines. What's sauce for us gooses is sauce for Indian ganders. Oops, that's my 'values' breaking out, sorry.

BTT: wouldn't it be wonderful if all Muslim girls, in Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Yemen, could have the comforts and rights of Ms Abdul-Mageid ? She's entitled to those, as an Australian, but I hope that one day, all women enjoy those same rights, to drive, to study, to go for a walk on their own, to marry who they like, to do what they damn-well like - something like the rights that boys and men enjoy in those countries.

I was talking last night at singing class to a woman who lost her uncle at Tobruk. Remember Tobruk ? The Rats of Tobruk ? If they had turned and ran, Egypt would have been overrun by the Nazis, the Canal would have been seized, and the Middle East taken over by fascism. But no, they stayed and fought. And died. For Ms Abdul-Mageid, in the long run. Australians died on Crete (1600 of them). Australian soldiers died in Syria (in two wars) fighting Ottoman imperialism the first time, Vichy French and Nazis the second time.

Fifty thousand Australian soldiers died in the Second world War. Six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis, as well as hundreds of thousands of Gypsies, homosexuals, communists, etc. How dare this silly girl compare the boredom and other difficulties of a relative handful of illegal immigrants on Manus and Nauru with those tragedies.

Love,

Joe

Dear Joe,

I don't think that anyone here is suggesting that
her comments were appropriate. They were not.
But the outrage that continues is over the
top.

See you on another discussion.

Foxy,

I suggest that if you don't want the 'outrage' to continue, don't stir it up. You need to be discerning about an issue before jumping in with an initial, ill-considered, knee-jerk reaction to something that you don't like, if you don't want a constant stream of sensible rebuttals.

Just saying :)

Joe

Dear Joe,

Where exactly am I stirring things up?

If you are referring to my comment in response
to yours about Latika Bourke - read your own
post that you wrote about that lady and then
you'll see who's doing the stirring.
You need to take your own advice. You're in no
position to preach to others.

Anzac Day was to supply Russia with weapons because the loony Czar was a nut like Wilhelm and had invaded Crimea without enough industrial back up. Russian and Germany were both miltary dictatorships . Turkey didn't like the Crimea grab nor did Britain and its Light Brigade cavalry , USA or Australia . But ANZAC terrorised the Muslims with naval broadsides on 25 April . Turkey became democratic but not Hitler or Lenin.

Nicknicknick,

The Russians had extended their empire by invading the Crimea around ninety years before Gallipoli (you ARE referring to Gallipoli, aren't you ?). Perhaps you're confusing the Anzac landings with some aspect of the Crimean War sixty years before ?

The US was not involved in the Crimean War. Come to think of it, I don't think they were involved in the Gallipoli landings either.

Turkey was not particularly Muslim or Islamist at the time, nor did it ever become all that democratic afterwards. An somewhat less so now.

Joe