Oh well Senator Anning said it !
The phrase Final Solution would not have been uttered by Hitler.
He probably said "Endlosung !".
Surely those two words together can never ever be used together again ?

But that is a side issue. More to the point is that there are a number
of countries, Britain, Holland, Belgium, Sweden and Germany who would
wish they had said STOP a few years back.
Notice how those countries politics are being turned on their heads.

The political upheaval in Europe is a direct result of Muslim immigration.
Now for the compulsory denial;
Of course all muslims are not terrorists !

Now having got the formalities out of the way;
The real problem is that their religion demands that they do not mix
with nonbelievers. They are forbidden to marry out of their religion
both by the religion and the families. Much like catholics once did.
Surveys in Europe have shown that quite high numbers of muslims will
obey Allah and given the opportunity will kill non believers.
These are not just dreampt up figures but real surveys by semi
government bodies and security organisations.

The problem is nobody can tell you which muslims will act on their
beliefs. All that we know is by example they will.
It is a bit like the air bags in the steering wheels of your car.
We do not know which one will kill you, so we are changing them all.

Make no mistake, we are just one large terrorist act away from
having our politics turned on its head.
What will you say if another 88 Australians are murdered ?

Bazz far more than 88 of us will die at the hands of that primitive section of Islam you target, bank on it, but know Fraser Anning did not speak for me, he did not speak for our parliament, or the majority of us, 19 votes, he got 19 votes for himself,then jumped to another party, we empowered his rant, by keeping the chook house we call senate.
YES ISLAMIC terrorism is primitive and barbaric, nothing you can say will change the fact they, half witted half human, kill more Muslim than us,, nothing will change a truth the Muslim community it by far the biggest contributor in giving our security warnings about terrorists
please consider *should we ban Catholics? because of some being paedophiles?*

Belly, interesting question you pose;
"please consider *should we ban Catholics? because of some being paedophiles?*"

Report this morning; some hundreds of catholic priests in one US state
accused of pedophilia.
Perhaps their training and selection system should be dismantled.
Similar problem with Islam;
The boys are like scattered pearls. (Koran).

Very nasty subject.

//Surveys in Europe have shown that quite high numbers of muslims will
obey Allah and given the opportunity will kill non believers.
These are not just dreampt up figures but real surveys by semi
government bodies and security organisations.//

Yeah, you can tell they're real surveys and not a fairy tale Bazz has just plucked from his fundament by the lack of numerical data. Proper surveys don't contain quantified information, they rely on vague and subjective phrases like 'quite high numbers', 'a small handful', 'more than you can poke a stick at' and 'sweet FA'.

Surveys with statistics in them aren't proper surveys at all, they're an invention to deliberately confuse the likes of Bazz and others who are remarkably so thick they struggle with the concept of percentages (I know, right? I don't get how anybody could be that crap at maths either).

//please consider *should we ban Catholics? because of some being paedophiles?*//

Yes, why don't we ban the Catholic clergy?

Of course not all Catholic priests rape children.

But surveys the world over have shown that very high numbers of Catholic priests will, given the opportunity, rape children. And the Catholic Church has demonstrated through its action over and over again that it doesn't think child rape is a very serious crime. Offenders go unpunished, or just receive a slap on the wrist; church officials with knowledge of child rape fail to report it; they believe they should be entitled to incredibly weak sentences when they do get caught out; etc.

The problem is nobody will tell which Catholic clergy will act on these beliefs. All we know is that some will. Get a large enough group of Catholic priests, and at least one of them will be raping children, and a good deal more will be actively shielding the rapists from any consequences of their actions. Is that a risk we can really afford to take?

What will you say if another 8 year-old is raped?

Reading the transcript of the Frazer Anning speech most of it was fairly standard stuff even the sentence mentioning "final solution"- "The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote." He has used variations of the word "final" six times in his speech. I can't really see what the left is talking about with the focus on "final solution" being a window into Fraser Anning's soul. Appears to be a left beat-up.

The more controversial aspect to his speech is probably his concern about Muslim Immigration.

Good on Anning. 84% of Australians are against multiculturalism. Anning speaks for the majority. The minority, including most deadbeat politicians, are carrying on like wild dogs because this man is mere!y saying what most of us think. The barkers and snappers do not believe in freedom of speech.

We should have maintained the white Australia policy. If people of different races were meant to be living together, it would have been that way since the year dot. All cultures are not equal, and they were never mean to be bundled together; it's a basic law of nature.

On the 'final solution': A silly comment that Anning should have known was going to have the barkers up in arms (although most of them are anti-Semites themselves), Hitler was advised on the solution by the grand mufti of Jerusalem. Hitler hated Christianity, but he admired Islam.

//Reading the transcript of the Frazer Anning speech most of it was fairly standard stuff even the sentence mentioning "final solution"- "The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote." He has used variations of the word "final" six times in his speech.//

Are you really not aware of the historical context of the term 'final solution', or just being a troll?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Solution

I mean, even if you're not bothered about his attitudes toward Muslim immigration, using that phrase about anybody displays an appalling lack historical awareness and sensitivity and is a disgusting affront to survivors of the Shoah the memory of those less fortunate. He should be ashamed of himself, and you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to defend the indefensible. Disgusting.

Sorry to use your thread for this piece of news, bazz (although it's not entirely unrelated) but it appears that Bob Katter might be eligible for Lebanese citizenship.

I refute the statement that 84% of Australians
are against multiculturalism.

When according to the 2016
Census 49% of Australians have either been born overseas
or had one or both parents who were born overseas. That 83%
lived in capital cities and the make-up of Aboriginal
Australians was 2.5% of the population. There are 300
separate languages spoken in Australian homes - and the
numbers are growing.

Our rich cultural diversity is one of our greatest strengths.
It is central to our national identity. Any claims to the
contrary - are from people who want to go back to the
days of the "White Australia" policy - which is simply
unrealistic.

Our country and the globe has moved on
and changed since those times - at least for most people.
Our immigration policies are no longer based on race - and
religion - but on skills. Yes, perhaps the numbers need to
be looked at - regarding sustainability - however to go
back to the past - is not a viable objective in a world
where countries are dependent on each other.

Alan Jones (rightly) described the reaction to Senator Anning’s maiden speech (remember, maiden speeches have always been sacrosanct) as “contrived indignation”. He said that the biggest 'crime’ was the 'faked outrage of our nation's leaders’. I must say that wasn't aware that anyone was leading Australia these days.

Jones, as many of us would also would have done, also noted Turnbull and Shorten reaching over the table to shake hands in a “unity ticket” against freedom of speech

//this man is mere!y saying what most of us think.//

He got 19 votes, ttbn. N-n-n-n-nineteen. I suspect his views are less popular than you imagine from inside the comfort of your bubble. And I think if you came out of your bubble and talked to some people in the real world, you might be surprised to learn how few people consider it appropriate to use the term 'final solution' in the way Mr. 19 Votes did.

//If people of different races were meant to be living together, it would have been that way since the year dot.//

So let me get this straight: your argument is that because people hundreds of thousands of years ago didn't have the technology to allow easy travel between different geographic regions, that makes racism OK?

Fail.

//and they were never mean to be bundled together; it's a basic law of nature.//

It really isn't. The laws of nature aren't like that; they're descriptive rather than prescriptive, i.e. they say 'this is what happens', not 'this is what should happen'. You're attempting to derive 'ought' from 'is'; I recommend that you read what Hume has to say about that.

//On the 'final solution': A silly comment that Anning should have known was going to have the barkers up in arms (although most of them are anti-Semites themselves)//

"Dvir Abramovich, chairman of the Anti-Defamation Commission and an expert on Jewish culture, called Senator Anning's speech "historical trivialisation of the worst kind imaginable".

"Mr Anning is entitled to his views, but he discredits himself and his argument by irresponsibly referencing an evil plan that led to the calculated murder of six million Jews and millions of others in the Holocaust," he said."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-15/fraser-anning-history-of-the-nazi-phrase-final-solution/10122812

On a scale of 1-10, approximately how anti-Semitic would you say Mr. Abramovich is? Just curious.

//Hitler was advised on the solution by the grand mufti of Jerusalem.//

Nope, that's an urban myth.

http://time.com/4084301/hitler-grand-mufi-1941/

Two posters make the claim most even we are told eighty something percent are against multiculturalism a term those using want in truth and end to Muslim migration, any claim, after both sides united that a majority exist on the hate/xenophobic, side is clearly untre now sections of a faith, not a single race, are targeted here we here on OLO in my view are over represented by the very right very lost hate tribe *should we deport Asians because some are criminals?* faith is always an issue as one faith uses its God [that never existed] to even kill members of another fantasy group

"The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote."

I well remember reading in the history books how Hitler campaigned on the notion that the best solution to the Jewish question was to put the issue to a popular vote. Anning's intentions and policies are so close to Hitler's its like they're clones. </sarc>

The views expressed by the senator are probably not a majority view (yet). But I'm sure they have a much higher level of support than the political class finds comfortable. Not being able to argue the issue on its merits, the solution (not final but usual) is to howl the man and his supporters into silence. Throw the word racist around with gay (!) abandon and hope that sufficient numbers are intimidated into keeping their mouth's shut. (BTW when did Muslim become a race? Is Christian a race also?)

Picking up this phrase is just the hook to allow the braying mob to give their howls a veneer of thoughtfulness where none exists. If it wasn't that, they'd have found some other hook to hang their outrage on. Did he really say immigrants 'concentrate' in the cities? Did he really say Australians need more 'living space'. Oh the humanity.

Whenever someone expresses views that the political elite find repulsive they swarm in outrage. Mostly it works and the offender is silenced. Sometimes it doesn't (Hanson, Trump, Farage, Hirsi Ali) and the outraged find new levels of angst.

But what they don't realise or prefer to ignore is that the open expression of the views might be silenced but the views remain simmering below the surface.

"84% of Australians are against multiculturalism".

What orifice was that figure pulled from?

I don't recall that question ever being polled, let alone published.

Hi there BELLY old friend...

I'm so glad to see you're back in the saddle as it were, giving us all the benefit of your sage advice. However if I may, you did make one tiny error in your latest contribution apropos Muslims. '...the Muslim community is by far the biggest contributor to giving out (sic) security warnings about terrorists...'? Actually BELLY that's not quite right.

Some years back (I've mentioned this to you before) I was with a task force working the Punchbowl/Bankstown areas for drugs, money, and guns, as well as evidence of potential terrorists cells (in collaboration with ASIO Officers) which was very much in it's infancy in those days. Speaking with any Muslim, male or female, was like discussing politics with a brick wall. Nothing, zip, nought. They would never betray a fellow Muslim for any reason. I'm specifically referring to Lebanese Muslims.

Toni Lavis,
I do not go around taking notes of everything I read so I can give you
and others references. You can Google these things yourself.
From memory; It was a survey by a British government body questioning
persons of interest I think it was, and 18% (6000)answered that
they would take part in a terrorist action.
The total figure was given as 6000 were interested in terrorism action.
They might have been returnees from the middle east.
So the Brits believe they have say, 6000 possible active terrorists.
After all the AFP has said they have 500 active investigations.

The Brits have a deradicalisation body who have done similar surveys.
You have stirred me up to go and find the data again.
Irrespective of all that it is undeniable that muslim populations in Europe are a real problem.
This last week in Gothemburg is another example.
The latest London event may be a Melbourne syndrome.

He's a senator, Toni; they don't get many votes, so he can still speak for most of us on this subject. And, what makes you think that you know more about the real world than I do?

Ease of travel has nothing to do with where people live. Even now, with the no borders ratbaggery, people need permission to switch countries. The White Australia policy kept people from asking. And it is natural that certain people were born in certain places. The darker their skin, the closer to the equator; the lighter The skin the further away from it. And, yes: white people really don't suit Australia. I'm a third generation Australian, but I would gladly head for the UK (if they got rid of the undesirables that they have allowed in) and leave Australia to its own devices. The way things are, however, my ancestors did all the hard work to make Australia what it is, so I'm here to stay - and I would prefer that non-whites/non-Westerners stayed where they were born. And I don't give a stuff what someone from some daft Commission has to say about Anning. I'll make up my own mind.

And, no, there is know urban myth involved. You naturally gravitate toward crackpot commentators.

Never mind, I found a poll.

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/multiculturalism-good-for-australia-say-85-of-australians

That one says that 85% of Australians are in support of multiculturalism, not against it.

Some people make a habit of getting things backward.

Bazz,

You have no need to supply references for anything you post. I don't because there are certain idealogues on this site who want references just so that they can rabbit on about how right wing your source is or the publication the source used is. And of course nobody, no matter how knowledgable or qualified they are, can be right if they don't lean to the Left. You rightly present an idea, and those who don't like that idea can get knicked or just present their own ideas. OLO is only about opinions after all. And as the lefties really don't have minds of their own, but rely solely on their Marxist idols, they cannot accept that the rest of us a capable of original thought and opinion without the help of someone else.

'Bigotry' by Japanese has certainly created a terrorist free country. Inconvenient truth. The hysterical reaction to the speaker by the biggest anti semites and leftist media is breathtaking hypocrisy

ttbn,

"...The darker their skin, the closer to the equator; the lighter The skin the further away from it. "

Spherical objects.

//He's a senator, Toni; they don't get many votes, so he can still speak for most of us on this subject.//

He's a Senator for Queensland. There were 3,096,281 enrolled voters in Queensland as at Dec 31 2016. 19 out of 3,096,281 million is a whopping 0.0006% of the vote, or about 6 in every 1 million votes. Yep, sure sounds like he speaks for a lot of people. [sarcasm]

//what makes you think that you know more about the real world than I do?//

The contents of your posts.

//Ease of travel has nothing to do with where people live.//

Bollocks.

//and I would prefer that non-whites/non-Westerners stayed where they were born.//

And some people would prefer not to stay where they were born. Different strokes for different folks.

//And I don't give a stuff what someone from some daft Commission has to say about Anning. I'll make up my own mind.//

You rebel, you.

It may not surprise you to learn that I don't expect anybody would be disgusted with Anning making light of the Holocaust because of what some stranger was quoted as saying in a newspaper, I expect people would be digusted with him making light of the Holocaust because it was the f%^king Holocaust for f&^ks sake.

Although apparently some people aren't, which is a worry.

How the hell did we get to the point where people think the bloody Holocaust wasn't that bad, actually, that's all just lefty propaganda?

//And, no, there is know urban myth involved. You naturally gravitate toward crackpot commentators.//

Right... so one hand I have Time magazine, an extremely well respected and well known publication with a sound track record of journalistic integrity, in a report based on a translation of the offical German record of the meeting:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/full-official-record-what-the-mufti-said-to-hitler/

And on the other hand we have you, with your zero sources and your quaint belief that providing sources is some sort of display of weakness.

Sorry, remind me again which one is supposed to be the crackpot commentator?

o sung wo, old mate you speak the truth about those areas, I too have some early work life knowledge of those ares, room exists in my statement to tell I am not protecting the few, but once that historic cop, Bumper Farren was sent to sort out many WASP including one of his task forces last acts,Villawood in its worst time, migrant ganges v Fairfield, off Italian background, it is not much different that today, just difference in faith not country. should we have sent those British/Italian migrants home?if we could o sung wo, I rather think a new generation Bumper or two would be of help these days, not however racist hate

Toni,

You respect Time as much as you wish. I don't.

The thread is an expression of fear, fear of change, fear of difference, and fear the few we need to target can in any way, take over our country, they can never do that, in truth after a few generations their offspring will be so much like us that you can not tell them from us,we are better than that bigot, his first
preference vote was 19, proof even voters do not agree with him

Is Mise,

Same to you, pal. Your are not in touch with nature. Black skins are more suited to hot conditions, white to cool. Some would say that the original arrangement of people types was part of creation, but I won't get into that. Let's just say it makes sense, which it does.

" I don't expect anybody would be disgusted with Anning making light of the Holocaust "

Read the speech. He didn't mention the Holocaust. He put two words together that had a specific meaning at a specific time in a specific place but which have other means at other times in other places.

"The Final Solution is a 2003 documentary directed by Rakesh Sharma about the 2002 communal Gujarat Riots that arose as a response to ... ". Perhaps Anning was making light of the Gujarat riots...what a racist, eh?

Poor Toni is getting rather overwrought about an interpretation of the phrase that holds no validity but which is being used to divert attention away from the actual substance of the speech.

As to surveys about Muslim attitudes in Europe, its hardly surprising that Toni and others are unaware of the attitudes of Muslims since these data are regularly hidden or 'massaged'.

But there's plenty out there. A few examples

ComRes poll for the BBC in 2015...45% of British Muslims believe Muslim clerics preaching that violence against the west can be justified reflect mainstream Muslim opinion.

http://www.comresglobal.com/polls/bbc-radio-4-today-muslim-poll/

"But 27% of the 1,000 Muslims polled by ComRes said they had some sympathy for the motives behind the Paris attacks."
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31293196

There's heaps out there on this issue and it rarely reflects well on the Mohamedians...hence it is ignored.

Try looking at the myriad Pew polls about Muslim attitudes world-wide

that 85% of Australians are in support of multiculturalism, not against it.
rache,
was that survey done in a University canteen ? That'd be 15 % Australian & 85% other or un-australian.

Belly,

"...in truth after a few generations their offspring will be so much like us that you can not tell them from us,.."

Funny that you should say that; some Hindu guy said the same thing a thousand and more years ago in India, guess what, he was wrong too.

You can tell them from the others in India today because more and more Muslim women are wearing the black robes and covering their faces, because in their local mosques they are being told to dress as Muslim women so that they proclaim their faith.; how do I know?
My Muslim friends tell me so.

Belly,

" Bumper Farren [Farrel] was sent to sort out many WASP including one of his task forces last acts,Villawood in its worst time, migrant ganges v Fairfield, off Italian background, it is not much different that today, just difference in faith not country. should we have sent those ..."

Being WASPish again?
The Italians were almost certainly Catholic, which is opposite to WASP, not only in faith but also in ethnicity.

You ought to read your own posts before pressing the button.

Bazz, I think you may have looked here (not that I'm wading into this topic, but you got me wondering): https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/articles/opinion-polls.aspx

Once again we find ourselves tossing between fact and fiction, left and right, reality and emotion, and I can go on.
Most of you will not be surprised to hear that I applaud this Anning guy.
I am heartened to see that the only thing the left have picked on (actually two) is that of the Muslim comments.
Now to put some reason back into this discussion, I must point out that it is not practical nor possible to 'send anyone back'.
But we can put a halt to the immigration of a certain people who insight violence as apart of their religion.
It cannot be dismissed simply because there are those within who would feel empathy for certain people.
Someone asked the question which essentially was to decide which would we choose to expatriate, Muslims or Catholic priests, because they violated children.
I would answer; which would you rather be, the child who was violated or dead?
We now know who the pedophiles are in the various religions, because their acts of molestation are now historical, so therefor easy to weed out and punish.
Where-as when a terrorist, terrorises,'people die'.
Now I do not have a complete answer, but it would seem prudent to halt any further immigration of Muslims.
I found it amusing that overhearing a large group of migrants (first gen) mostly a mix of Asians, I found that they had become Aussies.
So much so they were quite adamant that immigration should stop.
They all contributed reasons as to why.
All the reasons were extremely valid.
They ranged from the lack of water to the lack of jobs, in Australia, and many more.
So it is that intelligent mature adults of any race, colour, creed and so on, come to a consensus surprising all who would otherwise see them as traitors to their own people.
It appears that when someone practices a life of inclusion, they, at some point become one with their new home and yep, before you know it they're an Aussie.

ALLTRAV,

"It appears that when someone practices a life of inclusion, they, at some point become one with their new home and yep, before you know it they're an Aussie"

Best of luck, as I posted earlier, the Muslims have had over 1,000 years to integrate in India and there is no sign of any integration yet.

It's not all that long since the last communal riots and only 60 odd years since they split the country apart.

and as an example of peaceful integration,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_riots_in_India

I believe most people want Sunni Muslims banned from Australia including other Muslims. Muslims kill each other as much as kafir.

Issy, I am agreeing with you.
My point is that 'IF' they practice inclusion or in other words, integration, things would be fine.
But they don't.
In so doing they are not 'trying' to be inclusive.
Quite the opposite by being 'exclusive'.
Unfortunately there is no 'quick' fix.
It is clear to me that the answer is an impossible one.
And that is; if you truly want to get along with other humans on this Earth, you MUST either refute the Muslim religion or at the very least, reject certain 'anti-social' aspects of it.
This is not possible under the teachings of Mohammad.
It is punishable by death for a Muslim to denounce their religion.
So it is they are stuck in this emotional and religious catch 22.
Ergo, it then follows that we have no choice, the evidence is clear, and we must be vigilant as this has become a matter of life or death.
So in relation to the choice between deporting a priest or a terrorist, well I think the answer is obvious.
And for the benefit of the loony and belligerent left, the priests can stay.

In life there are few if any absolutes, no one side in any debate is all right or all wrong.
Muslims are not all evil, not all a threat, if you,,, had the task of resolving concerns put by what clearly is a man isolated from most of us, Anning, you would have to give ground to gain anything, observe the backlash, see this morning Katter's loss of both financial and other support, then note Annings adviser left his job, yesterday, AUSTRALIANS WILL NEVER [THANKFULY] believe any of what Anning said, we, however will continue to be concerned that a section of that faith do not want to in any way, we are talking of a minority, become like us, one day across that invisible table talks may take place that are not race/faith driven, that could see both side give a little ground to gain some

Are the left that stupid, or is the importation of left voters, no matter how destructive to our lifestyle, more important than our lifestyle.

Surely even the lefties are aware of the huge Muslim industry in the UK, which took over child welfare institutions only to enable the grooming & provision of pre teenage girls & boys, [yes boys too] for their disgusting sexual practices.

To scream about the small number of home grown catholic priests, & ignore the fact that this disgusting Muslim practice is justified in their religious teaching is at least disingenuous, & in fact almost criminal.

I can't think of anywhere where high Muslim populations, even 100%, has not led to civil war. We should start a sweepstakes on when it will start here.

We need more MPs with guts to stop this rot.

More children have been groomed and raped by Muslim men following their religious book that sanctions child sex in England that any Priest in England defying the teachings of Christianity. Jesus taught, anyone offending the least in society deserves a millstone around his neck and cast into the sea.

the left and Islam has much in common. No wonder they often unite to falsify and demonise what if often decent. The bbc and friends certainly did a lot to hide their paedophiles? Anyone charged for helping hide them? Thought not. Look what they did to Tommy Robinson who exposed dozens of muslim paedophiles. Whose side did the left take?

Our Education departments need to really focus on a combined effort to stop indoctrinating with nonsense & start teaching sense.
They've had their time, get on with proper education. Or, do we really want an Australia as it is now ?

"Our Education departments need to really focus on a combined effort to stop indoctrinating with nonsense & start teaching sense".

The problem there is that they have already made the 'combined effort' to actually do the indoctrinating, and that's why things are the way they are. Education departments are held to ransom by Marxist teachers' unions. There is no point to appealing to government departments who are the cause of the problem in the first place.

There is a huge difference between multiculturalism and multinationalism/multiracism.
What we have had until recently is people of many different national or racial backgrounds who shared similar values.No one denies that previous intakes of migrants have caused alarm in some people but in the final analysis, previous migrants have shared similar cultural beliefs and have integrated well into Australian society. Even the smaller percentage who were non Christian came from non violent religious backgrounds and have settled in well, becoming contributors to our society.
Today is a totally different ballgame. We are importing a group who do not want to change those cultural beliefs that our society finds objectionable. Forget about food and restaurants, those are negligible issues. The fundamental issue is the integration of a group who has accepted the cultural beliefs of the host society.
People can argue the pros and cons of this till the cows come home but in the end it comes down to one simple question.
Can anyone name a majority Judeao/ Christian country that has a population of 10% or more Muslims that is safe, cohesive and economically sound?

Big Nana,

I can name one, "La-La Land".

No Big Nana, I do not think that anyone can name such a country.
As an Imman said once; "If the Koran did not proscribe the death
penalty for apostasy Islam would have died out centuries ago."

The Muslims invaded India around the 10th century and as Ismise said
they are still attacking Hindus a thousand years later.

With the pressure of the death penalty muslims will continue to enforce
their religious beliefs. If you think that is fanciful look up honor killings.
The police in the UK are programmed to always look "on the bright side"
and there are signs of the police here being programmed to take
similar attitudes. To conform that just listen to the Victorian Police.
Young British girls literally in their thousands were groomed for the
sex trade around the UK and the police and local authorities looked
the other way.
They even arrested one father who was trying to get into a house to
rescue his daughter.
Remember the Skase Gang, they were just starting up the same thing
here when one brave girl gave evidence against Bil Al and his cousin
and they are now residents of the Super Mosque at Goulburn.

The crux of the matter is that the Koran encourages the killing of
infidels if they refuse to submit or to be dhminnmnis and accept
second class citizenship including paying the Jizah tax.
If you think that is a middle ages tax well that is the reason they
give for cheating on welfare payments in western countries.
They consider it to be the jizah tax which ALL non believers MUST
pay to muslims.

It is a matter of percentage. There is a clear correlation between
the percentage of muslims and the way they behave to the host community.
The leader of the Freedom Party in Holland Geert Wilder has published
the scale of percentage in his book Marked for Death.
I will put it up later.

Lets take a look at Mr Fraser Anning's maiden speech and
the accuracy of his claims:

1) He claimed that the majority of Australians want to see
a reduction in the number of Muslim people allowed to immigrate.

Not true. Research by Monash University
has found that 80% of people favour immigration policies that
are non-discriminatory. The study found that negative attitudes
towards people of the Muslim faith was less than 25% and only
15.8% of people think religion or race should be a factor in
deciding an immigration application.

2) Mr Anning claimed that 457 visa classification allows
foreigners to "steal jobs from Australians."

That visa class was discontinued by the government last year.

3) Mr Anning claimed that Australia's immigration policies
were set "on a whim."

In reality governments carefully set the number of people
allowed to enter the country in various visa classes.

Almost two-thirds of those who immigrate to Australia are
skilled migrants.

4) Mr Anning made remarks about the Bourke Street incident in
January 2017, when six people were killed and others injured
after a car ploughed into pedestrians in Melbourne's CBD.
In referring to the incident Mr Anning called it an "Act of
terrorism," perpetrated by a Muslim.

The accused James Gargasoulas, is Australian-born, and of
Greek descent. He is not a Muslim, nor does he have any connection
to terrorism. Police do not consider the Bourke Street
incident an Act of terrorism.

5) Mr Anning made an extra-ordinary claim that Muslims in
Victoria and NSW are 3 times more likely to be convicted of
crimes.

No available crime data supports this assertion. Authorities in
both states don't publish statistics on the religions of
offenders. Reporters have pushed Mr Anning on the basis of this
claim, but he hasn't commented.

6) Mr Anning has also waded into the complex so-called
"African gang" issue in Melbourne. Mr Anning made the assertion
that most of the people referred to as being part of the
"African gangs" are Muslim.

cont'd ...

Foxy you must have a cast iron constitution, you stayed here day after day wallowing in some very lost very very far right mud while I retreated, *left* a word spat Trump like at any one who still has an active brain, the few, who seem content to claim to be thinking like the majority, continue to pile up the junk, yes I know some Muslims are a threat, but have they read the first testament? do they want to know about that? if it was my task to sit at that table, to try to bring both sides a little closer, SOME of my claims would cheer up our detractors, number one!Foxy will not like it! an end to the BURKA, out law it,based on togetherness, remember before condemning me,we could not walk on their streets dressed as we wish, in all things effort from both sides not one is needed to gain any thing

cont'd ...

7) On #AW Neil Mitchell - pointed out that most of the people
referred to as being part of the "African gangs," are
Australian born and that the offenders were not Muslim -
as most South Sudanese identify as Catholic.

8) Mr Anning called for the "White Australia" policy to
be re-instated which ran from 1949 to 1973.

The speech-writer said to have penned Mr Anning's speech,
Richard Howard denies being an extremist despite his
fascination with Nazi Germany - hence his reference to
"The Final Solution."

News Corp's - News.com.au - asked the question -

"Are lessons in history so obscured by time that any part of
Australian society - particularly some of those whom
Senator Anning presumably appealed to, whose forebears
fought and died to end Nazism - can't grasp the significance of
"The Final Solution" in this content for what it is?'

Finally the question that News Corp asks is -

"All Australians must ask themselves - do we want racially
based laws instigated by a politician who has ironically
landed himself in Parliament via a racially based law
(i.e. Section 44 of the Constitution)?"

The statement and title of this discussion - "Someone
Had to Say it!" Beggars the question - WHY?
There's surely enough mis-information
around as it is.

cont'd ...

In answer to Big Nana's question - of naming one country?

What about Jordan.

Does it qualify?

We have to acknowledge the fact that Islam is one of the
world's major religions and claims the allegiance of a
fifth of the entire human population. Although Westerners
often think of Islam as an Arab religion, most Muslims
are not Arabs. The largest Muslim populations are in
Indonesia, India, China, and even the Soviet Union.

Islam is the second-largest faith in Europe after
Christianity and it competes with Christianity in many
Black African countries.

Blaming all of our problems on Muslims?

I have a question - If every single Muslim were all sent
back, if we got rid of every one of them, every man,
woman and child - would any of this speed up the two-hour
drive on choked roads that we take to and from work, boost
the numbers of nurses and doctors in our public hospitals,
make our education system any better, or increase wages,
the dole, or our pension payments?

Foxy,

Did you actually read the speech or just rely on someone to tell you what you wanted to hear?

1) Australian Population Research Institute from 2017 found that 48% want a ban on Muslim immigration. Essential poll from this year found similar. I can't find the Monash poll you refer to so I can't advise where you ent wrong. Send a link and I'll explain it to you.

2)"That visa class was discontinued by the government last year." It was renamed but the visa remains and is still colloquially referred to as 457.

3)Mr Anning claimed that Australia's immigration policies
were set "on a whim." . IF you get around to reading the speech you'll see the comment in full makes sense. Taking one phrase out of context simply indicates a desire to find fault where none exists.

4)" Mr Anning made remarks about the Bourke Street..." Bourke st is NOT mentioned in the speech.

5)"No available crime data supports this assertion." Therefore no data can refute the claim either. If governments decide to hide inconvenient facts by simply refusing to collect the data, inevitably people will make guesses based on less reliable data.

6)"Mr Anning made the assertion
that most of the people referred to as being part of the
"African gangs" are Muslim. " NUP. He referred to "African Muslim gangs" but that doesn't mean that other gangs aren't muslim.

7) As per 6 above.

8) "Final solution" is just a phrase used in many contexts apart from the Nazi context. See my earlier post. People insisting it hides Nazi tendencies are simply trying to howl down dissent by finding racism where none exists.

Its always best to go to the source, Foxy, rather than relying on some partisan to lead you down the garden path.

As someone might have said; "It is the religion stupid !"

Ask any muslim if they obey the Koran's assertions as to how to treat
the nonbelievers.
They will never deny these passages from the Koran. They are the word
of Allah and must be obeyed. It is blasphemy to say otherwise.
The punishment for blasphemy is death.

Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then
kill them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (2:191)

Kill the Jews and the Christians if they do not convert to Islam or refuse to pay Jizya tax. (9:29)

Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them. (4:89)
NB 4:89 is why they live in ghettos, so as to avoid assimilation.

Stay away from non-Muslims. They are all liars. 9:107
NB irony here, there is a clause that allows them to swear false
oaths in our courts if it advantages a muslim. So why do our courts
allow swearing oaths on the Koran ?

All this goes on and on as a religious support to oppose our customs
and laws. Anyone who affirms to be a muslim cannot be an Australian.
If they are born here they are committed to betray the country.
They are committed to introduce Sharia Law to Australia.
In Britain the courts have recognised sharia law in family cases.

This what it is all about.

We wander is strange fields talking about ten percent of Muslims in the west, any care to name just one western country with that number? tell me what percentage we have here,, take it for granted you know Chinese are by far our biggest number of migrants,,? no? never knew that? maybe we should start hating them then, while in a majority here thankfully we the day before yesterday as a nation said no to Fraser Anning and all he stands for

mhaze,

The following link is a fact-check testing of some of the
claims in Fraser Anning's first speech to Parliament.
There are other links on this subject on the web that you
can also access. I am not in the habit of choosing
links that agree with my point of view (occupational
habit to remain objective) - and in this case especially
I was merely interested in the accuracy of the Senator's
claims.

Here's the link:

http://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/fact-check-testing-the-claims-in-fraser-anning-s-first-speech-to-parliament-20180815-p4zxpf.html

Sanjeev Sabhlok came to Australia from India 18 years ago. He believes that Senator Anning’s concerns (albeit “ill-articulated”) were a “fight for Australia’s soul”. Sanjeev had a position in government, but decided to get away from Indian corruption and come to Australia, a country he saw as largely adhering to the principles of law and liberty, and the mores of Western civilization.

But, Sanjeev is aware of Australia's “drift to the left”; white leftists are “rapidly eroding” the very things that attracted him to Australia in the first place. His concerns are similar to those of Fraser Anning, but he notes that some confusion in his maiden speech have “ made the media lose the bigger picture”, which was the “defence of Western civilisation”. Sanjeev opines that the media’s inability to understand the difference between Anning’s call for a plebiscite on immigration, and the absurd idea that he was calling for extermination of certain people, means that ".....something has gone seriously wrong with basic English education in this country.” He points to the opinions of more sophisticated commentators, such as Paul Kelly, who concerned about Muslim immigration and lack of assimilation just as Fraser Anning is.

Sanjeev writes that it is “high time for all Australians to unite to defend its core foundations of liberty and democracy”, and, Anning is right to “....raise the impending loss of Australia's soul”.

So, all you lefty self-haters and detractors of your fellow Australians and Western culture, not all non-white immigrants from non-Western cultures appreciate your assumptions that you are doing them a 'good turn’; in fact, you need to try to put aside your arrogance and find out if ANY of them like your absurd posturing and behaviour bordering on treason.

Sanjeev also objects to the leftist multiculturalism policies which are creating ghettos in Australia.

David Cameron, former Prime Minister of the UK and
Leader of The Conservative Party once wrote in The
Guardian - "The challenges of cohesion and integration
are among the greatest we face... We cannot bully people
into feeling British. We have to inspire them."

"You can't even begin to talk about a truly integrated
society while people are suffering racist insults and abuse,
as many still are in our country on a daily basis..."

"No Muslim I've spoken to is offended by Christmas, or supports
its replacement with something else - but many Muslims that
I've talked to about these issues are deeply offended by the
the use of the word "Islamic" or "Islamist" to describe the
terrorist threat we face today."

"What we need is a greater understanding of the true nature
of the terrorist threat...By using the word "Islamist" to
describe the threat we actually help do the terrorist
ideologues work for them, confirming to many impressionable
young Muslim men that to be a "good Muslim" you have to
support this evil campaign."

Edmund Burke stated - "To make people love their country, Their
country ought to be loveable."

"Integration has to be about more than immigrant communities
"their" responsibilities and "their" duties. It has to be
about "us" too - the quality of life we offer, our society,
and our values" Such as tolerance, understanding, and
generosity.

peaceful integration,
Is Mise,
Do you think the Left has the sense to stand back & think ? Something tells me we'll have a long wait ahead before that happens.

I just took part in an online poll that asked if we should have a plebiscite on immigration. Only small poll, currently about 5,000 responses but the result? 97% have said yes to a plebiscite.

Foxy, Jordan doesn’t qualify. I asked for a majority Christian/ Jewish country with up to 10% Muslim population.
Jordan is about 98% Muslim.

Dear Big Nana,

The results should be interesting.

So I'll take that as a "No, I didn't read the speech" from Foxy. Just find someone who'll tell you what you want to hear and go with that. And that's called 'objective'. hmmmmm

As to the value of your sources...they make the same assertion about Bourke St. But if you (or they) read the speech it doesn't mention Bourke St. So the sources are rubbish, biased and designed to achieve an outcome, not to fact check.

But that won't stop you believing them, heh Foxy.

Dear Big Nana,

I know what you asked for however, I thought it interesting
that Jordan contains some of the oldest Christian
Communities in the world (Wikipedia) - Christians having
resided in Jordan after the crucifiction of Christ in the 1st
century AD. Thousands of Western Iraqi and Syrians are now
happily residing in Jordan. And all this in a Muslim country.
A big difference from what's going on in Israel.

mhaze,

Neither will it stop you from nit-picking so I'd
say we're even - you charming old coot!

Well not much has been said about the percentage of Muslims in this country in truth that number dare not see the light of day here it is far less than 3 percent,lets just say we shut the gate, every western country shuts its doors Trump like, to Muslims, what do we do about those already here?in hating, blindly, Muslims do we understand once, like Greece, they contributed a great deal to mankind?they did you know, if we are very very brave, if we see evolution not divine intervention gave us breath, we could instantly kill most of this worlds needless hate

//He put two words together that had a specific meaning at a specific time in a specific place but which have other means at other times in other places.//

Yes, language is a funny beast and context is definitely important. I mean, take the c-word for example. Not a word that bothers me particularly, and one that is fine in, say, the context of me and my mates having a yarn down the pub. But even given my natural tendency to swear like a Dutch stevedore, I'd have been a little taken aback if Mr. 19 Votes had started dropping c-bombs in his speech.

Even though he clearly thinks that Muslims are c^%ts and he'd have been honestly and directly expressing his views, there'd have been outrage, led by the very people who are currently defending his right to free speech. It's a funny old world.

Context matters: the phrase 'final solution' was quite innocuous right up until the point that it was discovered that the Nazis used it as a polite little euphemism for horrific genocide. And after that, I'm afraid, it became somewhat tarnished.

And I suppose even in 2018 it's okay to use in certain contexts. For example, if you're diluting a highly concentrated chemical solution it's not uncommon to perform a serial dilution involving a series of increasingly dilute solutions until you reach the 'final solution' at the desired concentration. But then again, you could just as easily call it the 'last solution'. Or you can just number them (definitely the easiest option). There are many options to choose from. As long as you get the right result, it doesn't really matter.

That's the interesting thing about the English language. We have these things called 'synonyms'. By cleverly substituting a synonym for 'final' (last and ultimate spring to mind) into his speech he could have expressed the same meaning with different words, thereby avoiding the existing connotations attached to the loaded phrase 'final solution'. But he chose not to do that.

I mean, if he'd just got up and called Muslim's c&^ts I wouldn't exactly have applauded, but I'd have been less offended by that. At least that's just putting sh!t on Muslims, not dredging up the spectre of the Shoah. For no damn reason at all except so that people would look at him, like a child throwing a tantrum. Pathetic.

A line between 'within the pale' and 'beyond the pale' must be delineated somewhere. When people start employing Nazi propaganda and then when pulled up on it going 'hey, relax buddy, it's fine'... that line has been crossed.

It's not OK, mhaze. And none of your fancy words and clever jibes, witty though they may be, will make it OK. 6 x 10^6 people, mate. That's a whole lot of not OK you've got to outweigh, and your words aren't good enough. Nobody's words are good enough to counterbalance that much not OK.

//Can anyone name a majority Judeao/ Christian country that has a population of 10% or more Muslims that is safe, cohesive and economically sound?//

I'll give it a crack if anybody can name a majority 'Judeao/ Christian' country with a population of 10% or more Muslims. Because I can't think of any, although I presume you've got some corrupt/war-ravaged/former Soviet-bloc/impoverished (circle as appropriate, more than one option may be circled) hellhole to surprise us with

Toni, the reason I asked about the10% level is because countries like Sweden, who have a Muslim percentage of about 5% are witnessing some really difficult situations and anti Muslim sentiment is growing because of high crime rate and non integration of Muslims. So it would be obvious to presume that a higher level of Muslim occupation would promote even higher levels of disruption in a society.
Jelly, with regard to Muslims already here, I think most Australians are accepting but also very aware of what is happening overseas and wanting to not see that replicated in this country. Keeping the percentage low here would help acceptance and aid integration into our society.
Frankly I think the UN should be pressuring the wealthy Muslim countries to take most of the Muslim refugees. We are seeing from the events in Europe what happens once Muslim numbers reach a certain level and hostile enclaves grow within areas.

if we got rid of every one of them, every man,
woman and child - would any of this speed up the two-hour
drive on choked roads
Foxy,
No, but it would in the near future !

I don't understand.
'IF' certain people are known to have malicious agenda in their beliefs, and they are known or proven to act on these beliefs, why aren't they tagged 'persons of interest' by appropriate authorities?
For example, so called 'outlaw bikie gangs' are refused entry into some states because they are 'persons of interest'.
They have been accused of many crimes.
A few have been found guilty of wrong doing, but the rest haven't.
Yet they are criticsed and vilified for being associated or knowing these other bikies.
I'd like to know the difference, other than 'most' of the terrorists are dead by their own choosing, but were still identified, and if alive would also be in jail.
Probably the same jail as the bikies.
Could someone explain the difference, in that the terrorists also associated with others of the same race/religion.
Why are they not tagged like the bikies?
As it stands the terms of reference are very clear and under those same terms of reference these people should be on a watch notice.
At the very least.
You wonder why I find this country so lacking.
I can guarantee that if I wrote book where-by I made it very clear that I would kill Australians no matter what, I would be arrested 'with prejudice'.

the UK police are still trying to work out the motive for the latest attack by a muslim immigrant a couple of days ago in London. If the Police are that thick what hope is their for our resident regressives.

Foxy, in relation to online polls. ABC news currently asking if Senator Anning should apologise for his comments about migrants.
Currently 65,000 votes. 40% say yes, 60% say no.
Being an ABC site I was really surprised by the response and perhaps the Senator wasn’t too far wrong.
ABC have closed the poll.

I believe that France has a muslim population between 20% and 30%.
The only betting going on there is when will the civil war start.
Unfortunately that is no longer a joke, people seem to be taking
it seriously. I do not read French so it is hard to get a realistic
idea of just what the feelings are in France.

People here seem mainly to talk as though the Islam problem is new.
Many are not aware and the schools certainly do not mention that
Islamic armies have been invading Europe India and Africa for 1400 years.
The whole of the middle east by the year AD500 was Christian, Jewish
and Zoroastrian. After Islam was formed the Arabs invaded Mesopotamia
and introduced Islam at the point of the sword and the three options.
Where are the Jews and Christians of those countries now ?

Between that time and today there have been about 800 battles between
Islamic armies and European armies.
The most notable campaigns were the battles for Spain, Sicily and the
Balkhams.
The invasion of France was stopped at Tours by Charles Martel in 732.
Saudi Arabia is financing the building of a celebratory mosque on the site of the battle.
Does that tell you something ?
The invasion of Switzerland seems to have ended after the Tours defeat.
Many are not aware that an Islamic army invaded and occupied the Vatican.
They were driven out by Italian local provinces.
Rome itself was weakened by the Arab slave trader's raids that over
years captured about one million Europeans and sold them in the
African slave markets. That continued with raids as far apart as
the coast of Britain, Ireland and even Iceland.

The two invasions of Austria are better known as they were defeated
at the gates of Vienna the last battle in 1683 when Vienna was saved
by the arrival of a Polish Army.
People criticise those Eastern European countries for refusing moslem
immigrants, but can you blame them after being occupied by muslims.

Cont:
The slavers continued until the 19th century when the US got fed up
with the attacks on their ships and sent in the Marines.
Hence their anthem "From the shores of Tripoli--".

Those that ignore history will repeat it !

Lot more later.

Well, well, well.
What's this I hear.
An ABC poll, none the less, has found that 60% of the people canvassed, 'AGREED' with this Anning guy.
The loony left are looking for windows to jump out of.
So much for all the goody two shoes babbling that some on OLO go on about.
Real people, the ones who are not brainwashed or contaminated by PC crap, who are not 'well meaning'?, and not have the emotional and cognitive reasoning of some five year olds, or uni students for that matter, see things for what they are and not what they're told.
I am always gracious in victory and I won't carry on like a lefty loony.

Bazz,
How dare you state facts. You're denying the do-gooders of the loony Left a chance to argue.

The difference is we as people all have life spans, where as Islam is a movement.

My fear is there will come a time when the numbers are strong enough, 10,20,50 or even 100 years from now, where so called moderate Muslims will be forced to choose between their faith, or the country they have called home.

I think I have a fair idea which way they will go, don't you!

rehctub,
i know a few australian blokes who have switched to Islam so that they could marry Malay & Indonesian women.
Imagine how many, especially leftist Australians will flock towards Islam once they're promised Dollars ?

I understand that a 10% Muslim population is where the trouble really starts. I wish our thick politicians would realise that Muslim immigration is much more dangerous to the West than terrorism. Immigration is now the PRIME method for creating a world caliphate.

The more Muslims, the fewer Christians. Forget the Islamophobia invented by the Left; Christians are the most persecuted minority in majority Muslim countries. Look at the Copts in Egypt. There are areas in the Middle East where Christianity prevailed well before Islam arrived, but there are no longer Christians in those areas. In most of the African continent, Christians have been driven out or destroyed. Since Western interference in Iraq, the Christian population has been decimated. In the very cradle of Christianity, Christians are no more.

And, for those of you who think Christians could not be persecuted in a white, sophisticated country like Australia - you are dreaming. White Western Leftists are already condemning and speaking against Christianity . You don't have to look further than this site to know that. These people are the same people who are apologists for Islam; they will go further and be in cahoots with Islam when the right time comes - in the belief that they will be safe. The idiots don't realise that, if any people have total contempt for atheists, it is Muslims. But, the anti-Christian Left is too busy tearing down its own culture to realise who their really enemies are

Individual, what do you mean by, 'once they're promised dollars'?

ALTRAV,
Just as some blokes convert to get a woman, so will many who are promised higher positions with higher pays if they convert. We already have proof beyond reasonable doubt as to how much many people here are governed by money. Once a country has a majority Mulsim population, things will change. Because Western leftists are so sucked in by democracy, they won't be able to turn back on their democratic ideaology & will have to accept becoming a Muslim Nation purely on majority (democratic) grounds.
Keep in mind that far too many people who call themselves Australian are prepared to go under the hammer with their faith in exchange for money. Even if the price is as high as a Muslim Nation..

Individual, fair point, and quite within the bounds of many Aussies.
As you say.
I am frustrated at the 'do gooders' and the 'well meeners', but I cannot accept that these people refuse to even consider that there is a sinister side to everyone.
Some more, some less.
We are born with ALL the emotions.
Some people choose to suppress certain feelings because it makes 'them' feel uncomfortable to express them.
In doing so they are living a 'false' life.
This is exactly the same as PC and all the crap it promotes.
So if we don't speak our minds sooner rather than later, if at all, we will live to regret it.
If in speaking our minds, and what we say is true or an honest opinion, and in doing so, offends, so be it.
I would rather offend someone than be compromised later on for not having spoken up at all.

I would rather offend someone than be compromised later on for not having spoken up at all.
ALTRAV,
Yeah, I too don't want to hold back anymore, too much to lose. Anyone who pretends to feel offended by what I state is in my book already an offensive character so, no damage done.

I said I would put up the percentage scale that Geert Wilders said
were the levels at which Islam changes its attitude to the host population.
I have not been able to find it.
It went something like this;
to 5% only intermittent attacks on individuals.
The sort of thing we have seen in Australia.
Plots for attacks such as operation Pandannis.

to 10% much more belligerent attitude for moslem "rights".
Occasional attacks on churches and Christian symbols.
Demanding sharia law rules apply in separate courts.

15% to 20%. Refusal to accept the law in no go zones.
Police, ambulance, fire brigade not welcome and attacked.
Attacks on police stations and churches resulting in destruction.
Police stations rebuilt as fortresses.

25% to 50% Demand for Islamic government.
Armed revolution.

My recollections, room for error but principle can be shown by what
is happening in Europe. Malmo in Sweden has rebuilt its police
station in no go zones as a fortress after it was badly damaged.

I know some will be offended at such as the above but it is just the way it is.

"it is just the way it is?"

Not according to Tasrum Chopra - (link given below):

She tells us - It's
fraught with lies, and lacking any statistical
basis? She states that -
We have seen how some people have demonstrated
a stunning lack of knowledge about a community whose
presence in this country originates from pre-European
settlement - via Maccassan pearl divers settling in
Australia's North West region, marrying into Indigenous
communities.

She explains that -

The following streams of Muslims in the
19th century - like the cameleers from India, Pakistan
and Afghanistan who were involved in mining and building
this country's railway and building infrastructure. All
are apparently overlooked.

She confirms the -

Current contributions and accomplishments
of today's Australian Muslims at 2.2% pf the population.

The fact that -
They're made up of taxpayers, CEOs, enterpreneurs, writers,
surgeons, doctors, aged care workers, taxi-drivers, nurses,
artists, engineers, educators, MPs, parents, students,
law enforcement officers, military personnel, academics, sport
stars, actors, comedians, celebrities, TV personalities, TV
anchors, dancers, musicians, to name just a few.

And -

"Apparently their invisibility is essential in maintaining an
Anning-like grasp on reality."

"What people like Senator Fraser Anning and his ilk unfortunately
do not seem to comprehend is -
"that try as they might they
will not succeed in conquering the resilience of our diverse
and strong communities. These communities have survived and
will continue to thrive because like it or not Australia
is a diverse and robust multicultural society. Australia is a
nation built on migrants and their contributions."

"Of course Muslims and migrants are easy fodder for a news grabbing
headline and a sure fire way to bolster one's career and
ratings."

Sadly, however, she tells us -
"the collateral damage in the after shock of
their bigoted rants relagates
2.2% of the population into a state of vigilance wondering when
this will end. Until then, we remain fighting for the right
to be respected, protected and included in our own home.
We shall not be moved."

Here's the link:

http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/life/culture/article/2018/08/15/why-fraser-anning-wrong-about-muslim-australians

Foxy, I do not see the relevance of your post to my post.
It is the way it is and you can see it for yourself if you wish to look.
True up to about 5% we see the occasional shooting such as the
assination of the police accountant just because he walked out of a
police building. Those that supplied him with the gun, in a mosque,
are now residing in the Super Mosque with a heap of terrorists brothers.
If the plan to blow up the MCG on finals day had suceesded would your
attitude to my post be the same ?
Somehow I think it would.
Just be thankful that the plot to blow up the Etihad flight out of
Sydney failed because they did not not read the baggage weight limits.
Would your attitude be the same ?
Somehow I think it would.

Australia is a nation built by people from every part of this world; a strong, independent, multicultural nation.
Foxy,
The above are Penny Wog's words. They're not 100% correct because Australia was not built by people from every part of the world. By many yes, by all no.
There were no Somalis, Lybians, Syrians etc. people from the middle east dust bowls when the building of Australia was on in earnest. These nationalities began to show up when everything was in place. Probably close to 100% of them were Muslim who are now turning against the so-called civilisation that built this nation. They come from places with thousands of years of history from great people before them. They're not the descendents of the intelligent ancients, they're insipid blow-ins & all they achieved is conflict & rubble. Now, they're introducing this regressive mentality here.
Penny wong should have gone to the middle east instead of Australia.

Bazz,

How's your attitude towards Catholicism because of child
sexual abuse? How's your attitude towards the Irish - because
of what the IRA did? How do you feel about what the colonials
did to our Indigenous people? How do you feel about the mafia?
The Aussie bikie gangs, or the drug & crime syndicates? or football
hooliganism? or thugs who king-hit passers by on streets?
And the list goes on.

You can always attach hatred and labels to whoever you want!
It's strange that in this discussion
there's so much talk about "freedom of speech," but those
that profess to believe in "freedom of specch," are the ones
who attach labels when that speech or opinions don't agree
with their own - then people are given lables like- socialists,
leftists, Marxists, "do-gooders," and so on. Sad really.

Foxy, that is the weakest of all excuses.
Surely you can do better than that.

Indy,

You need to do a bit of research before you post.

The first camel drivers the Afghans
arrive roughly around 1860, and the Adelaide,
South Australia to Darwin Northern Territory railway
is named "The Ghan" (short for Afghan) is their memory.

Lebanese arrived from 1880, Syrians were first counted
in the 1891 census, 1920 and 1930 - Albanian
Muslims. The first mosque in Australia was built in 1861
at Marree, South Australia, The Great Mosque of Adelaide
was built in 1888 - and so on.

I can't be bothered looking up the various nationalities
because you can do that for yourself. However, you need
to remember that although our history books used to tell us
that "The First Fleet arrived. It brought 1000 English
convicts." It didn't. It brought 1000 convicts but
they came from a dozen different countries. As somebody
stated - "English jails were no respecters of nationality."
The first Italian arrived on January 26, 1788 -
Giuseppe Tuso. There were people from South Africa, from
Ceylon, from India, from Spain, from Portugal. from Hungary.
And so on. So when someone asks, :Do you believe Australia
should be a multi-racial society?" I usually reply that -
"It doesn't matter what I think, I can tell you what it is,
which is a society of tremendous diversity."

In some schools 90 per cent of the students speak a
language other than English as their first language.

Bazz,

So can you old chap. So can you!

You should be better than that!

How do you feel about what the colonials did to our Indigenous people?
Foxy,
Tell how you feel about it ? Tell how you feel about what many indigenous did to well meaning people who were brought here against their will ? Tell how you feel about the thousands of public servants who make life a misery for people who are victims of incompetent politicians ?
Australians have moved on although many are straggling behind the times hence do-gooders are still not acknowleging the massive benefits that come courtesy of blue collar workers.
If I remmber rightly, it was the do-gooders of the past 50 years who fought tooth & nail to restrict discipline & were the proponents of leniency in the sentencing of emerging criminals.
And, wasn't it the lot of Leftists who marched & demonstrated for free speech but now they're stifling it with PC ?
As you very well know the sabotage by the Left is now coming home to roost. Admitting it is the difficult part.

Indy,

The difficult part is to not think in terms of
general categories which enable you to make sense of
the world by simplifying its complexity. The difficult
part is to try not to see the world in very rigid and
stereotypical terms.

The difficult part is to stay away from vague and
sweeping statements and to not have negative attitudes
rooted in generalisations about groups of people in
the belief that they all share the same supposed traits -
thus ignoring the differences among individuals.

The art of reasoned intelligent argument without resorting
to labelling and insults is not something that's easily
acquired.

Foxy,
you certainly put a new meaning to the term 'answering a question:.

Foxy, I have to say you can not compare the huge numbers of Muslims coming here as migrants today with the handful who came 200 years or so ago.
The aboriginal family I married into had several Malay Muslim pearlers married into it and whilst they were Muslim they certainly weren’t very devout.
None of the Malay men in the north were, from what I have been told. They all married non Muslim women, their children were raised as christians, they didn’t keep to religious days like Ramadan and they ate non halal food, perhaps because nothing else was available. They all learnt to speak English very quickly and totally integrated into the local community.
There was no problem with Muslim enclaves forming, of wanting Sharia law, of polygamy, of child brides or the issue of religious clothing in public areas.
Same with the Afghan camel drivers, they married aboriginal women, just like the Muslim pearlers did.
What we are facing today in city areas is a totally different situation.

Dear Big Nana,

Thank You for proving my point that we can't generalise
about Muslims - they do not all behave exactly the same.
Just as neither do Catholics, Jews, or any one else.
We need to allow for individual differences. People
are not all the same. I've stated several times in the
past on this forum that - when discussing migrants,
especially non-British migrants people are sometimes
tempted to lump all newcomers together and treat them as
one homogeneous species. Nothing is further from the truth.
Australian immigrants vary a great deal in their ethnic
backgrounds, cultures, religions (and the way they practice,
or not) and educational levels.

Their current social and educational needs are not homogeneous,
either. People have settled in Australia for various reasons,
economic, change of lifestyle, refugees, adventure, family
reunions and so on.

Also, I forgot to add that despite your telling us about
the 60% of Australians being in favour of a plebiscite -
on immigration - Fraser Anning's claim that the majority
of Australians want to see a reduction in the number of
Muslim people allowed to immigrate is not the case.

Research by Monash University has found that 80% of people
favour immigration policies that are non-discriminatory.
The study found that negative attitudes towards people of
the Muslim faith was less than 25% and only 15.8% of people
think religion or race should be a factor in deciding an
immigration application.

Foxy, it appears you purposely and intentionally try to direct your examples to a conclusion of your choosing.
Like most surveys.
I must remind everyone that even though I have had close ties to Muslims and lived and worked amongst them, I must once again alert you to a previous point, and that is; because we don't know who the bad ones are we cannot simply ignore the fact that they are amongst them somewhere, there MIGHT be those who would want to harm us or worse.
Now because we don't know who they are and because they have made it patently clear, through so many versus of the Koran, that they must kill anyone who speaks against Islam or will not convert to Islam, that we must take a different view of those in this cult.
I don't know who's good and who is bad, do you?
I also remind people that even though we have had a large number of foreigners come here over the many years, NONE,NONE, have displayed any aggression or malice towards us as much as we are witnessing today.
So,Foxy, Toni and CO. stop asking for proof, evidence and so on.
Firstly the theme of this Forum is OLOpinion! not OLFacts.
So as much as I love my fellow man, how stupid do you have to be not to protect yourself against an aggressor.
All previous immigrants had localised 'punch ups' in their early years of settlement here.
That is OK as the young bucks fought for their bit of turf.
But this, no this is completely beyond the pale.
This cult has already warned us then it has shown us, what will happen.
I don't have any ideas as to what to do, but I tell you what, someone had better and had better implement it quick.
We must be strong and stand fast against the do-gooders and the like.
They are a very large part of the problem.

Oh Foxy, you would be well at home on the Rotherham Town council.
You talk just like they did until the TV program destroyed their credibility.

Very ironic new item on TV tonight considering the discussion here.
The Moslem bikey squad being taken away at the police building in
Parramatta on murder charges.

Note the sign at the side;
"The Curtis Wang Police Centre"

That is the name of the Police Accountant I mentioned a couple of
posts back that was murdered by the moslems from Parramatta mosque.
Don't try and answer this Foxy it would be worse than anything that
Senator Anning said.

Thanks to those here who support White Australian's in Australia. I can't remember Foxy's heritage but it goes to show that White Australian's and any country needs to be very cautious about granting citizenship especially to cultures very different to our own. Different cultures have different values it would be racist to expect them to change their values but it is also racist for them to change ours. Even people that are born in Australia may not necessarily have a strong attachment to Australia. Multi-gen Australian's and those of British Heritage seem to value Australian Culture more. Sadly White Australia and Australian Governments in the past has been too generous to immigration. I often ask myself why someone would want to move away from the place where they are born and from those they care for. The explanations seem to come down to better opportunities, conflict in their own countries- neither of which are generally the responsibility of White Australian people. A lot of the reasons for the lack of opportunities and conflict within poor countries is due to bad management. Certain people have a hypothesis that people of different cultures are basically the same as we are- not everyone agrees with this hypothesis- those that disagree with this hypothesis are labelled as racist and guilty of hate- and in some places such as Britain gaol these people. So governments have created social disharmony and now feel they need to penalise those that object to enforce harmony. Australian's have to reward loyalty and punish disloyalty. Socialists, universities, major parties, unions, businesses, mining companies, media have been disloyal to the White Australian diaspora. Given that many of the new migrants from India for example are younger than other Australian's- its possible that they would constitute a large proportion of people (given the curve of demographics) that are suitable for military use (between 20 and 35 years of age) in the case of a civil war.

Canem Malem,

Just to clarify your last post, would you define White Australian?

CM, look out, I feel a trick question coming on.
Think about your answer before writing it.
Make it a good come-back.
I think we both know where Issy's going with this.

people should never forget that it took just 19 radicals to bring America, the worlds 'super power' to its knees. Just 19. Imagine what 19 million could do if/when the are forced to obey the radical Muslim leaders of the world.

Now for those not concerned with immigration, or more specifically, uninvited/illegals, my opinion is the displacement of people is the start of WW3 with the tactic being to shift these people to countries with high human rights values. The aim being to economically cripple those countries, and it's working a treat here.

The time has well and truly come to wake up and smell the roses people.

Toni,
Yes I get that you are triggered by this phrase ('final solution') and perhaps the Senator should have issued trigger-warnings for all those snowflakes who are traumatised by innocuous words. But the man has said that he had no intention to reference the Holocaust when he put those two words together. And bear in mind that his ‘final solution’ was a vote. He wasn’t calling for the government to start stockpiling cattle cars.

Sorry, but its confected outrage to try to howl the man into silence. Good to see it didn’t work. There’s hope yet.

“fancy words and clever jibes, witty though they may be”…well half of them anyway.

Foxy,

“ you charming old coot!”
Adjectivally you’re half right. But I’m not old.

“will it stop you from nit-picking”
Yes I see. You offer up utter unresearched rubbish as evidence for your prejudices and that’s ‘objective’. I show that your utter unresearched rubbish is rubbish and that’s nit-picking

mhaze,

You are so far off the mark on this one.

You haven't proven anything. The comments were made by
Fraser Anning regarding the Bourke St incident - and
News Corp attributed the comments to his speech which
I quoted as they appeared in several newspapers. However
it appears that he made those comments on 3AW in his
interview with Neil Mitchell.

BTW - you need to be a bit more selective in who you
choose to defend. Prior to his speech - nobody had even
heard of Fraser Fanning. Now people can't stop talking
about him. Apparently he was instructed (according to
"The Insiders" program - to deliberately be "controversial."
So that he could garner publicity to be re-elected.
To make himself "known." He's certainly achieved the
publicity.

I could not understand how a man who only got 19 votes
(only 19 people voted for him) how this bloke managed to
secure a $200,000 job. There must be something dreadfully
wrong with our electoral system.

Have a read of the following link from News Corp - about where
this bloke's real allegiances lie - as well as
the other perks that
he'll be getting for the next three and a half years.
And then tell us why he deserves to be where he is and voice
an opinion. Perhaps as the link points out - he needs to
getting elected first.

http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/19-people-got-this-bloke-a-200k-job/news-story/f8d8aaa83f0c2bcab53626455a3698d6

If you're not "old" how can you explain your behaviour?
Ah well, perhaps some people are not "old" in age - but
are in behaviour. I understand. My three-year old grandaughter
is an "old" soul.

What a lucky man Senator Anning is. All this over the top ratbag screaming by the left has lifted his profile from "who" to the bloke with the right idea.

No longer one of Keating's unrepresentative swill, but a man with strong opinions & the guts to shout them to all. The rubbish feigned shock of the left rabble, picking only 2 words of a speech to focus on must have lifted this blokes chance of being re-elected by a factor of about 90%. They have turned a speech that less than one in 10,000 would have even known had happened into an item on news broadcasts.

Suddenly he is no longer "WHO" but the bloke who wants to fix our ridiculous immigration levels.

Amazing, the left have actually done something useful for the first time in a decade, & now wish they hadn't.

Dear Hassie,

Not sure what the "Left" have to do with anything.

He's caused the controversy with the help of his speech
writer - all by himself. The trick for him now is going
to be to get re-elected. 19 voters don't a majority make.
Read the link I gave.

Hasbeen,

I agree. The Hansonites have found themselves an alternative (Pauline started jabbering about Goebbels because she didn't 'get it' either), and Katter has become more animated. No use to me in SA, but the speech might finally embolden others to speak their minds now that that have seen that the loony Left can't do a thing about Anning except, as you say, raise his profile.

It looks as though the usual OLO combatants are going to continue thinking they can win arguments or convince someone to change their mind, but Fraser Anning has said all there is to be said, and we can sit back and enjoy.

Foxy said -
"Lets look at what are the key values of democracy:
1) The need for free and fair elections.
2) Freedom of speech.
3) Equality before the law.
4) Active citizen participation.
5) Protection of minority rights
Foxy,
where does 5) leave the 19 Anning voters then ?

The first camel drivers the Afghans arrive roughly around 1860,
Foxy,
Thank you for that info. I'd better get onto my old Geography teacher & various Ecyclopedia for making me believe Afghanistan wasn't anywhere near Somalia & the middle easern dust bowls.
See, I too can be as selective as you with evidence.

It's amazing how obvious the 'wrongens' are.
Is it a skill?
To be able to hear truths and yet deny them almost immediately after.
It appears I must remind the naive do-gooders about a poll their very own church, the ABC, did recently.
After all according to their loyal band of followers, if it's the ABC it must be true.
Well the ABC conducted a poll re; Mr Anning and whether or not he should appologise for his comments about migrants.
Here's the first kick in the marble bag;
60% said NO!
And that's taken over 65,000 voters.
The second kick to the marble bag came when our scum backing ABC, closed the poll soon after.
No doubt, because it was not representative of their leftist looser views.
So, as I have been preaching to all and sunder.
You lefty losers are pushing against a tide of reality.
The majority of 'real' and informed people don't want these stupid ignorant ideas put into practice.
We are always allowed to think and work things out for ourselves.
The left seek change for the sake of change.
If it ain't broken leave it the f#(k alone.
You people have been the problem all along.
In your haste to have your irrelevant agenda adopted, you are totally mindless of the fact that the 'real' people don't want you or what your pushing.
Let me say this if I want to be a bigot, racist, and whatever else YOU people consider to be bad, GOOD, I will hold those titles with pride.
Because I am being labelled by a cult of 'nobodies', it is in fact a expression of accolades.
So thank you, you nut jobs, I hope they re-open the mental institutions they closed many years ago, due to budget cuts, and you will be taken care of in the manner you deserve.

Foxy,
"You haven't proven anything."

Well I did prove that he didn't say what you said he said in the speech. And I did prove that there was polling to support his claims. And I did prove that he didn't say what you said he said about African gangs. And....

"BTW - you need to be a bit more selective in who you choose to defend."
I wasn't defending the man...just the facts.

That you think its OK to distort because you disapprove of what he said, says quite a bit. IF the man was so beyond the pale those who seek to close down his voice shouldn't feel the need to distort and dissemble to prove him wrong.

"If you're not "old" how can you explain your behaviour?"

You said I was charming and old. I'm not old but...charming? well if I do say so myself...

You don't need to be old to discover the facts.

I find it more than a little interesting that you think its OK to make errors of fact because your sources were wrong. If I were you I'd spend a little more time checking my sources and a little less rushing to accept confirmatory views.

mhaze,

A couple of things: -

Fraser Anning's claims were fact-checked by several reporters
in quite a few newspaper articles - and while he may not have
referred to Bourke Street in his speech - he did speak and
refer to the incident to political journalist Mark Riley
when Riley spent an hour or so interviewing Anning on
Thursday. So it was not something that was made up. You can
access this information for yourself on the web.

Also Anning's other claims have all been fact-checked and
corrected by the media.

I totally agree that it is important to get the facts correct.
Something that does not seem to concern Mr Anning at all.

cont'd ...

mhaze,

Here's the link:

http://thewest.com.au/opinion/mark-riley/fraser-anning-is-a-senate-stirrer-with-elephants-hide-ng-b88931141z

/Yes I get that you are triggered by this phrase ('final solution') and perhaps the Senator should have issued trigger-warnings for all those snowflakes who are traumatised//

Yeah, I don't see this issue as being about the politics, as your anti-SJW cliches would suggest you do. I'm so used to condemnation of Nazis being a bipartisan position embraced by Tories and lefties alike that my brain can't seem to process it as a political matter.

Do you really not understand why people might be upset by a phrase that has become synonymous with the Nazi genocide, other than being SJW's? Because if that's the case, I think there may just be too large a gap between our experiences and understanding of the world to allow meaningful communication.

//by innocuous words//

I'm still not sure how a phrase that refers to genocide qualifies as 'innocuous', mhaze:

http://i.imgflip.com/p1ij6.jpg

//But the man has said that he had no intention to reference the Holocaust when he put those two words together.//

Then why put those two words together? As I pointed out, there were plenty of other choices. I'm not saying the man's a Nazi sympathiser, but he definitely chose that particular phrase for a reason.

And that reason was to stir up a big fuss. I mean, he may as well have lay down on the floor of the Senate, kicked his arms and legs and screamed 'Look at me, look at me!!'. Which would have actually been more mature on his part, because he wouldn't be relying on the controversy surrounding his punk 'I don't even care the Holocaust and what'cha gonna do about it' attitude to get attention. It's like having Sid Vicious for a Senator.

I can't begrudge the man wanting to grab some attention for himself - I'd be feeling a bit inferior too if I knew I'd only gotten into the Parliament on a technicality and that I was somehow less popular than that lunatic Malcolm Roberts.

But the reasonable thing to do, after having grabbed that attention by dropping a clanger in his opening speech, would have been to come out and say 'Sorry, didn't mean to inadvertently offend anybody affected by the Holocaust, made a mistake, some of my best friends are Jewish'.

Also the sensible thing, from a strategic point of view... Jews and Muslims aren't known for getting along well, so if your target is Muslims why go ahead and piss off a bunch of Jews by being flippant about something they tend to take quite seriously? Seems to me like burning bridges before you've crossed them. Mental.

//Sorry, but its confected outrage//

No, I assure you, the outrage is genuine. Although that's a good rhetorical tactic, I'm going to have to remember to use that on Tories... nothing is going to make an angry Tory angrier than patronising them. And nothing is this world is quite as funny as a properly angry Tory, as long as they don't go too far and start being offensive.

//to try to howl the man into silence//

Oh dear :(

Really? After your lambasting of snowflakes before, you come out with this? Deary, deary me. Poor old Tories, I guess their skin must be worn thin by all the sand they have in their vagina. Because when they criticise lefties it's just robust criticism and healthy debate, and you don't to see many lefties whining about people trying to silence them.

But turn it around, and oh boy, it's all 'thought police' this and 'censorship' that. Mind you, none of the Tories ever do actually get silenced. They just like to have big sook about the mean lefties not letting them have their say every time a lefty criticises something they've said.

As I said, extremely sandy vaginas on the right side of politics these days.

I wonder what is in planning as a 'final solution' for when the Left has gone too far & sensible people can no longer tolerate nor afford to keep the useless hangers-on.

Indy,

They'll do what they have done for decades.

They'll -

Import more people to do the work and the" heavy lifting"
that all the useless "hangers on" don't want to do or
aren't capable of doing.

At the same time
these useless "hangers on"
the self-assured, self-entitled men in suits will hide
behind parliamentary privilege to play the victim in
factless rants and complain about the loss of this country's
culture, despite the obsessive control and militarisation
of its borders.

Then they'll continue to keep degrading
and beating up on Muslim immigrants and asylum seekers -
confusing their own comfort with safety and confusing a negligible
loss of white-straight male Christian privilege as a fight
for their entire nation's survival.

I thought Anning had cleared up all this hoo haa about the 'two words'.
I'm not getting what the big deal is about mentioning these 'two words'.
If it is a matter of history and on the record, then it stands for all to see for all time.
If on the other hand there is some kind of caveat over these two words then let the appropriate authorities deal with the matter as is laid down by law.
The only thing that can be said about his speech is that it echoed the sentiments of what I see as the reasonable and informed, mature Aussies.
Those who have the mental and reasoning aptitude of a child do not have the ability to understand let alone accept the messages being conveyed in his speech.
The detractors are all mentally disturbed or social rejects, such as whatever it's gender is today, 'WrONG'.
What a load of puerile crap that came out of IT'S mouth, and so on the rest of the actors.
We all know how dishonest govt is, so why would ANYONE believe ANYTHING they say?
What, all of a sudden they became honest and started telling the truth?
Get real you pathetic do-gooders, they're just conning you.
As usual.
They don't give a rats about the speech.
If they were so incensed then they should have left the chamber as he said something they actually found offensive.
Instead these gutless two faced scumbags all lined up to shake his hand with a smile.
Liers, low lives the lot of em.
Anning is the only one who has shown true courage and told it like it is, knowing he was going to cop flack over it.

Toni, WTF does a sandy fanny have to do with anything we are discussing.
People, here's proof that the loony left are sick and need to be taken back to their respective mental institution.

At the same time these useless "hangers on" the self-assured, self-entitled ....
Foxy,
....Degree flashing Academics.
There, finished editing for you.

//Toni, WTF does a sandy fanny have to do with anything we are discussing.//

OK, I'll play along... it's a figure of speech, you halfwit.

But we both know you aren't really that thick that you needed me to explain that, right ALTRAV? So why the silly pretence?

Indy,

That sentence did not need editing or any additions.

It was quite clear in its meaning.

My job is to comment - yours is to try to comprehend.

BTW: Genuine academics have no need to "flash" their
degrees. Their qualifications are obvious.

Toni, no need for the name calling.
What if I responded with, I have no idea what your talking about, you presumptuous little prick.
Is that response more to your liking?
I did not have the luxury of attending the establishments of higher education like you it appears, because unlike you I have never heard any phrase relating to a sandy fanny.
Now, I'll try again.
WTF does the 'figure of speech mean' referring to sandy fanny?
And yes you halfwit, I am that thick.

//Toni, no need for the name calling.//

Then why do you keep doing it?

//People, here's proof that the loony left are sick and need to be taken back to their respective mental institution.//

//The detractors are all mentally disturbed or social rejects//

And so forth.

//WTF does the 'figure of speech mean' referring to sandy fanny?
And yes you halfwit, I am that thick.//

Nah, every time I ask for further clarification of crap you post you a throw a tantrum and say something along these lines:

//Toni, GOOGLE, WICKI, and more.
I do not bother to note authors or titles because if someone as 'common' as me can find these facts, other more adept people can find even more.//

So why don't you try that?

//And yes you halfwit, I am that thick.//

That's funny, because you seem to spend most of your time telling everyone how much smarter and better you are than everyone else. Make up your bloody mind.

Their qualifications are obvious.
Foxy,
That's exactly what I'm on about, too damned obvious. What i want to see is some evidence of competence & benefit to society. Nothing obvious there?

Foxy,
You said "I totally agree it is important to get the facts correct"

Yet I have caught you out on at least two occasions misrepresenting the 'facts' to support your arguments.

The first was your argument that Australia was 'racist', remember? And you were never honest enough to acknowledge your wrong doing.

Indy,

How can you say - nothing obvious there?

We have doctors, nurses, teachers, health professionals,
and many others on whom our society relies - where would
we be without them? There's scientists - on whom we rely
and who have made our world a better place and will continue
to do so with new discoveries and inventions - I don't think
you've thought this one through Indy. It's not the educated
that you have to fear. It's the siren calls of charlatans,
demagogues, and ideologues.

Banjo,

I did explain to you at that time.
You, did not accept my explanation That's par for the course
on this forum. I have always given a reason, a link, an
explanation - for my postings. Unlike many on this forum.
I, unlike many here - do not just pull things out of the
air - they're always backed up with evidence. However, the
evidence is often brushed aside as being "Leftist propaganda,"
and the name calling and accusations usually follow. In any case
this was some time ago - you need to move on.

We have doctors, nurses, teachers, health professionals,
Foxy,
believe me I fully understand where you're coming from. I have worked with some very highly educated people who couldn't make their own sandwich. Where people go so wrong in my opinion when they heap praise upon such academics, is that they don't consider the background people at all. By those I'm referring to the army of workers who put in the groudwork that makes it possible for these academics to shine, yet the workers get not no second thought. Look at speicialists for example, could they design & build the equipment made by workers ? Would a surgeon be able to shine if he had to build the equipment he uses / Would a 747 or A380 pilot be able to maintain the aircraft ? Would so many academics be able to create the computer programmes that give them th opportunity to do such 'great' things?
Just think of what would happen if the rubbish collectors went on a week's holiday ?
Of course, people study hard etc. but other people work hard etc. Mechanics need to constantly update their skills as do many, many others. just because someone has studied something for years does not make them smarter or more intelligent than those who have a trade. It's a matter of perspective & from my perspective highly educated people als make highly bad stuff-ups. I have worked with engineers who could not physically do what they drew on their designs, we made it work. It's like saying Pharao so&so build the pyramid. He never even got a finger dirty, uneducated slaves built it. As I said, perspective !

Indy,

I think we're talking at odds here. Nobody is denying
the value and work of others - be they tradies, garbage
collectors, plumbers, electricians, et cetera. You've
unnecessarily gone off on a tangent here.

My response was merely to your statement about academics
"flashing" their degrees. To which I pointed out
that they had no need to do that.
It was not meant to under value or demean anyone else.
You seem a bit sensitive on the subject.
I suspect the problem lies in your own mind (and possibly
with some personal bad experiences that you might have had).

Individual said- "If I remmber rightly, it was the do-gooders of the past 50 years who fought tooth & nail to restrict discipline & were the proponents of leniency in the sentencing of emerging criminals.
And, wasn't it the lot of Leftists who marched & demonstrated for free speech but now they're stifling it with PC ?
As you very well know the sabotage by the Left is now coming home to roost. Admitting it is the difficult part."

Answer - Very good point. Thanks.

Which point is good?

Posted by Toni Lavis, Sunday, 19 August 2018 6:55:02 PM- " the reasonable thing to do, after having grabbed that attention by dropping a clanger in his opening speech, would have been to come out and say 'Sorry, didn't mean to inadvertently offend anybody affected by the Holocaust, made a mistake, some of my best friends are Jewish'. "

Answer- Should Fraser Anning say sorry? Well... I think because he didn't directly refer to the holocast then his view is that no apology is necessary. If he is to bow to the appeal of a "vanishingly small minority that were offended" then this is bowing to political correctness over free speech. He probably sees, as many do, that "political correctness is being used as a weapon by the few" to control the majority and this is on balance- the problem. We don't have to buy into "left hypotheses".

Nurses used to be trained on the job not in universities. Nursing is a practical profession not something you can learn sitting on your bum.

There are many professions that are helped by "on the job"
training - especially in the field of medicine (not just
nursing). One profession that can be described in part
as "sitting on one's bum" - it that of politics. And as
we've seen recently - you don't even have to get elected
to get some jobs.

The term Professional is now on Par with the term Expert.
Personally, i prefer people who know what they're doing & think outside the square. Universities teach leftist compliance & cronyism & only a very few break away from that culture & become useful members of society because they have the sense to comprehend their education.
The vast majority of so-called academics are just a waste of time, resources & space AND they use up oxygen.

//Answer- Should Fraser Anning say sorry? Well...//

Sorry mate, I didn't quite catch that. You'll have to speak up a bit, I can't hear you properly over the noise of all the sand in your vagina grinding together.

'//Answer- Should Fraser Anning say sorry? Well...//'

I would of thought its the Marxist Jew hating press who deliberately misrepresented Fraser who should apologise. Then again the regressives more often than not misrepresent.

runner,

The transcript of Fraser Anning's speech is on the web
ibn full. Nobody is "misrepresenting" anything. It's there
for all to read. Perhaps you should try reading it -
instead of just buying into what your side of politics tells you.
Think for yourself - for a change - just once.

Indy,

You don't seem to realise that for most jobs people
need some form of training. There are trade-and-technical
schools for that purpose. Our builders, brick-layers,
concreters, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, motor-
mechanics, et cetera get their training in such schools.

Now, doctors, dentists, lawyers, architects, engineers,
eye-specialists, teachers, get their training in higher
education places. So does that make all these people -
as you refer to them "Leftists?" or under the influence of
"Leftists?" Where would our world be without these people?

They take up oxygen - but they do give you something in
return.

BTW - It's not only "Leftists" that you need to worry about.
There are the extreme right-wing conservatives that not only
take up oxygen but give you little in return.

Foxy,
Show me one Academic who is a conservative who makes his living from his/her ability & aptitude instead of some way out Arts Fund.
Many people do work that is cosidered menial by the academic elite yet such workers don't get Awards for simply doing their job.
Academic intellectuals look down on those who do such menial but vital work. I have long said true & educated & quality of life changing professionals should not be thrown into the same basket as simple, BA carriers so common nowadays.

Indy,

You asked for one - here he is:

A/Prof Dr Munjed al Muderis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munjed_Al_Muderis

An exceptional man.

Oh I see Foxy so you are opposed to allowing the people a say on Immigration which you know and obviously ignore was Frasers final solution to reducing terrorism, gang crime etc. You are one very slimy character in you misreprentation of people. Try addressing the issue instead of demonising the messenger as is the habit of regressives.

Posted by Toni Lavis, Tuesday, 21 August 2018 9:28:30 AM- "You'll have to speak up a bit, I can't hear you properly over the noise of all the sand in your ... grinding together."

Answer- Thanks for your feedback

The thing that many don't understand is that principles are dependent on the situation. If one clings to a principle (such as anti-racism) to the exclusion of all other principles- this creates a parody. Socialism and social scientists seem to be such- usually people that suggest a course of action do it because it is in their benefit. The purpose of universities is to ensure that the nation keeps abreast of technology and learning in the Socratic style. When the students of the nation are substituted by foreigners- universities fail to fulfill their function and become irrelevant. Universities have failed to be loyal to the Australian people- this shows they have lost touch with the Australian people. The Australian people were fools to trust universities objectivity and integrity. Australian youth and others have been crowded out of universities- if there is a correction in immigration and the education industry- Universities will lose funds and it will take a while before Australian's start returning to universities- many university workers will lose their positions. Many universities have been given favourable treatment by the Australian people. If they fail to act in the interests of the Australian people perhaps the University Of Sydney and others will find themselves relocated to Alice Springs. And their beautiful historical buildings will be used for the benefit of the people that built them.

runner,

Don't put words into my mouth.
Read what I actually posted.
And kindly stop with the name calling
and labelling. That's intellectually lazy.

The best brains in the world are attracted to universities,
they exist to do only one thing - further human knowledge.

What we need to beware of is managerialism that is eroding the
very concept of a university. Making money - seemingly for the
sake of making money - this seems to be the "raison d'etre" of
the modern university. University Presidents or Vice Chancellors
are paid an order of magnitude more than their (often) more
accomplished professors for no other reason that the former
have come to see themselves as business people.

We have to remake the university if it is to continue to play
its true role in encouraging scholarship. It is in danger
of losing its relevance as a centre of learning.

The modern university, captured by a managerial class, views
higher education as simply another good to be produced and sold
according to the dictates of accountants. Charles Darwin
would not get a university job in the 21st century, given his
extremely poor publishing record. Consider this after being
paid to take extensive fieldwork over a number of years
when he traversed the world, spending considerable time in
the Galapagos Islands (which he would not have been
allowed to do today by his university 'managers') he sat on
his data (which was to form the basis of one of the most
influential books of all time, "On the Origin of Species') for
nearly 30 years before publishing it.

He would have been sacked soon after returning from the
Galapagos Islands if two or three journal articles (in his
day, more likely a manuscript) had not appeared within a year.
This is the tragic situation that now exists.

How many Charles Darwins will be (and have been) confined
to meaningless work in the office because they do not play
by the rules?

Our societies have forgotten that education is the prime
public good. The attempt to apply market principles is pure
economic nonsense. Only those societies able to produce a
surplus - and allocate a reasonable proportion of it to
public education - will be sustainable.

Foxy,
yes, sounds like someone extremely useful to society. He must have have had bags of money when he arrived here because being able to study & support himself for the required two years before becoming elible for welfare/financial assistance calls for substantial funding.

Indy,

You need to read the link I gave you.

He worked his way and worked hard. He spent years
at the Curtin Detention Centre (hell on earth).
Everything he has he had to work for. And now he's
helping so many people not only in Australia but
around the world. He's even been honoured by the
Queen. A truly exceptional human being.

His book "Walking Free" is worth a read.

he was kept in at the Curtin Detention Centre. He was released after 10 months and carried on his career in medicine, eventually specialising in osteointegration surgery.
Foxy,
In your link it says 10 months ,not years. It also says he was kept which means he was housed, fed & clothed. Then he carried on in his medical field which undoubtedly paid rather more than the average wage.
A migrant (a normal one) has to prove up front that he/she can support themselves for two years with the aid of a sponsor. I guess your medico chappie was able to study whilst in detention as do criminals in prison. Meaning, they don't have the overheads of rent & food that a normal migrant has.
Anyhow, my argument isn't about useful professionals, it is about those who depart Uni with a BA, call themselves Academics & then expect & demand that the Govt, actually the taxpayers, owe them a living for providing exactly what in return ? Any links to one of them ?

Indy,

In Curtin Dr Munjed al muderis was given a number (they did not
refer to him by name) and it was hell on earth as he's described
it many times in great detail. He came here as an asylum
seeker. A refugee. He worked his way to where he is today.
He started off in country hospitals. Anyway, as I stated
previously - he is a remarkable human being and his story is
well worth reading.

Indy,

We seem to be going around in circles and I can see that
it's really pointless to continue our conversation.
I can't give you what you're after simply because I
don't know any people like the ones that you describe.

You asked me to give you an example of any one who departs
university with a BA and feels that that government owes them
a living, et cetera. Sorry I can't help you there. The students
that I know - all work hard and don't have the mind-set that
you describe.

University degrees cost a lot of money and students have to
pay it back. Student fees have been increased. While there's
been cut backs to university funding. So it's a struggle
for most students to survive. Young people are struggling
to get affordable housing and access to jobs so that
they can pay off their fees.

I'll leave things there - we're so far apart in this
discussion. I see no further point in continuing.

Have a nice evening.

I can't give you what you're after simply because I don't know any people like the ones that you describe.
Foxy,
You must be living in a cocoon, what about the likes of Sarah Hansen-Young or that git that recently sprouted off about asking 18 months old babies for permission to change their nappies. They are the Academics I'm referring to, the ones who are of no benefit to society.
Now you have a great evening also.

Indy,

Senator Sarah Hanson Young is not an academic.
She's a politician who like so many does have
a degree. But, just because she has a degree
that does not make her an "academic." I don't
understand you logic in all of this or the
points that you're trying to make. Especially
what's changing babies napppies have to do with
anything?

Foxy,
Because these people are all University educated i.e. academics. This really should be a new topic, Academics vs people with sense.

Indy,

No. academics work within a university combining research,
teaching, administrative duties. Academics are the life-blood
of a university, without whom the institution would not exist.
Sarah Hanson Young is not an academic. She was not employed
by the university. She merely studied there.

She merely studied there.
Foxy,
Ain't that obvious !

Indy,

So what's your problem?

Foxy,
It's past 10am. Looks like you're back on your public service computer ready for another hard day in the Library & on facebook? My problem is with half-backed so-called academics armed with a mere BA denouncing & looking down on those with common sense & exploiting the notion of democratic (majority) opinion so ripe in the public service & Unis because it is saturated with BA warriors, & sabotaging anything that would be good for society.
Did you know that many good people are driven to despair because of such half-backed BA carriers ? Go & spend some time time looking up the doings of Centrelink, Legal Aid, Council rorts, Govt contract rorts etc etc. That should keep you away from Facebook for months. You never know, it might even open your eyes to reality & make you realise the evil that is ideology.
Try & get a job in the public service's admin without a BA & see how far you'd get.

Indy,

For your information - there are many people employed in the
public service who don't have any formal qualifications.
I worked with many of them. A BA does not an "academic" make.
And, having a BA would not necessarily get you a good job
because degrees are only one of the criteria that employers
look at when assessing prospective job applicants. Experience,
counts for a great deal - as well as work ethics, references,
communication skills, general knowledge, interest in the job,
computer skills, people skills, and so on.

Numerous studies have shown that there is little or no
relationship between educational achievement and job
performance or productivity. For example, good grades in a
graduate school or medicine or education are poor predictors
of whether someone will become a good doctor or teacher.

The fact is that the skills required to get an A grade in a
university course on anatomy or educational philosophy are
not the same as the skills needed to deal with a medical
emergency or an unruly junior high school class.

The universities teach very little that is directly relevant
to the world of work. Most people pick up the necessary
skills on the job, not in the classroom, and the characteristics
that make for a successful career - such as initiative,
leadership, drive, negotiating ability, willingness to take
risks, and persuasiveness, are not even taught in universities.

Degrees, are only a start for most people. They then have to
go on and expand their knowledge and abilities by on the
job training. Universities produce graduates with any
number of educational credentials but with few specifically
job-related skills. In fact, many people never put the
specific content of their university education to direct use
in their jobs, and nearly half of the country's graduates
actually work in fields they consider unrelated to their
major subjects.

However, on the whole, a higher credential does often mean
higher earnings, simply because of the value the job
market places on it.

cont'd ...

BTW: I am no longer in full-time employment due to
health reasons so I'm not on a "public-service"
computer. And my work experience was more varied.
I worked in both the private, university, and public
sectors. Currently I volunteer part-time in the
dementia-wing of an aged care facility. Which I find
very rewarding. I also manage to help with looking
after my grand-children.

I certainly don't look down my nose on anybody (neither
do any other people that I know who have tertiary
qualifications).

Perhaps you need to go out more often?

Foxy,
I didn't realise you didn't live in Australia.

Foxy,
just for you

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QUWx59PZcHg&feature=youtu.be

Indy,

We obviously move in different social circles.

foxy,
I accept your last statement as it is the most true comment you've made here. Over & out !

Individual,

Foxy lives in Melbourne; now I realise that it's a strange place but it's part of Australia.

Is Mise,
Melbourne must be close to Utopia going by what Foxy says, none of the usual incompetent bureaucrats & other dodgy outfits encountered elsewhere.

Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 23 August 2018 1:31:18 PM

For example, good grades in a graduate school or medicine or education are poor predictors of whether someone will become a good doctor or teacher.

Answer- Some things require a university degree some don't. "Maths teachers should have a university degree" in maths or similar. It's a travesty that PE teachers teach maths. How are HS students supposed to be passionate about maths without passionate teachers.

Teachers are expected to reach unattainable goals with
inadequate tools. The miracle is that at times they
accomplish this impossible task. Schools, however,
cannot survive on miracles. Every teacher deserves
effective tools and skills. The question is: Can
psychology provide them? Can therapeutic concepts be
translated into specific educational practices?

I say "Yes." On the basis of techniques developed in
child therapy and tested in the classroom, concrete
suggestions and practical solutions can be offered for
dealing with daily situations and psychological problems
faced by all teachers.

As one young teacher put it, " I have come to a frightening
conclusion. I am the decisive element in the classroom.
It is my personal approach that creates the climate. It is
my daily mood that makes the weather.
As a teacher I possess tremendous power
to make a child's life miserable or joyous.
I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration.
I can humiliate, hurt or heal. In all situations it is my
response that decides whether a crisis will be escalated or
de-escalated, and a child humanised or de-humanised."

Many teaching problems will be solved in the next few decades.
There will be new learning environments and new means of
instruction. One function, however, will always remain with
the teacher: to create the emotional climate for learning.
No machine, sophisticated as it may be, can do this job.