Boaz, you have to be kidding.

>>All of my posts during that period were based on TWO fundamental elements... 1/ LAWFULNESS... 2/ DEFENSIVE.<<

I wonder whether you are aware that it is against the law to carry an offensive weapon? Each State has its own particular law - NSW calls it "Custody of offensive implement" which includes a rifle, gun, pistol, sword, knife, club, bludgeon, truncheon or other offensive or lethal weapon or instrument.

So, by definition, your exhortation that it is ok for people to carry "a baseball bat or a concealed licenced weapon as they walk about the street" is encouragement to commit a criminal act.

Which, interestingly, carries a two year jail penalty.

You would, incidentally, be hard pressed to claim self-defence, since the very act of carrying a concealed weapon would be considered to indicate aggressive intent.

Is the message about rabble-rousing getting through yet?

Boazy, I'm not "assassinating your character" - I'm simply reminding you and newer forum participants of your odious behaviour at time of the Cronulla riots. The direct quotes are your own words, and I've posted the links so that other readers can see for themselves the context in which they were written.

The fact that you persist in promoting your version of the Nazi slogan does more harm to people's perceptions of your character than anything I write about you. If you were to stop proclaiming "ONE NATION, ONE RACE, ONE CULTURE", then there would be no reason for I and others to draw attention to its similarity to "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer". The fact that you are bombastically intransigent on this issue says much about your own conscience and character.

You were certainly egging the thugs along, and your promotion of carrying baseball bats and concealed weapons was nothing short of incitement. Fortunately, you seem to have moderated slightly in the past couple of years, so we may be having some effect on you - but you still have a long way to go, as evidenced by your denialism.

As for Southern Thailand, the Muslim Malay former southern sultanates were annexed by the Thai kingdom in the early 20th century, and its population subjected to forced assimilation practices which they have been resisting more or less continuously for the past century.

Nothing at all to do with multiculturalism, but everything to do with conquest and imperialism. You should read some history, given that you claim to be a "history buff".

Pericles, you do have a minor point there.. carrying an 'offensive' weapon.. agreed.

The social context of that remark though, was that DURING that heated time, where:

a) Police were arresting, convicting and jailing the likes of the Penrith Panther (the bloke with the branch) they were ALSO
-Stopping,
-Speaking to,
- and LETTING GO groups of Middle Eastern youths who actually had such weapons.

b) Groups of middle eastern youths were bailing up and bashing at random any 'skippy' they found all over Sydney

It could be argued that to carry such a weapon was indeed 'defensive' in nature and intent. Though I grant legally and technically, you are correct on the point of carrying such. (not in the case of licence firearm)

CJ.. one mans odious is anothers 'understandable'. I did not at any stage urge ANYone to go out and thump middle easterners. I was expressing frustration at the police inability (and unwillingness.. documented and on record) to deal effectively with a real threat to public safety.

Given that the police transcripts of the time when the crowd of Middle Eastern youths were gathering at Punchbowl park show they deliberately did NOT stop them out of fear of 'numbers' and further exacerbating them, with the result of many Aussies being bashed, stabbed and nearly killed in the consequent invasion of Maroubra and Cronulla, it is quite justified to take whatever measures are needed to combat such a threat, whether it is technically legal or not.

You can call that 'odious' but if you do, we can simply agree to disagree.

On South Thailand, the 'annexation' was a century ago, they had been living in peace for decades. The violence only blew up recently.
Nothing more 'imperial' than Sultanates tend to be themselves.

The 'perception' of being neglected, real or imagined lies at the root of the violence. Such perceptions are the same as "John Howard is Pork Barrelling such and such a marginal seat" but when you add 'race' and religion to the mix, it becomes more volatile.

I don't believe you can attribute this upsurge in violence to the annexure, but granted it has to be somewhat of a background factor.

The violence is only 'anti imperialistic' due to the perception of neglect and possibly the Chinawat policy making things worse.

This also underlines the intrinsic problem.. "difference" is easily exploited when race and religion are involved.. which is my basic anti MC mantra.

Drensdener:

"Multiculturalism may sound warm and fuzzy in theory, but it is gradually destroying our country's sense of nationhood. It has diluted our national identity and transformed us into a conglomeration of hyphenated citizens with nothing in common.

Wrong. We started out that way, but a we are tending towards a common culture. Multiculturalism has never been a threat to our identitiy. At times it was the only identity we had. People who don't like multiculturalism are the ones who are really attacking our identity.

"Their mushy utopian propaganda was used to deceive the public in order to implement irrevocable changes with little real debate.

Can you be more specific, or would that diminish your rant?

As a "CONSTITUTIONALIST" my concern is first of all what is constitutionally applicable.
.
Howard, rudd and other politicians are on the Christian bandwagon when it comes to the Commonwealth of Australia but are the right?
.
.
Consider this;
.
Hansard 2-3-1898 Constitution Convention Debates
Mr. HIGGINS.-
I do not see, speaking in ordinary language, how the insertion of such words could possibly lead to the interpretation that this is necessarily a Christian country and not otherwise, because the words "relying upon the blessing of Almighty God" could be subscribed to not only by Roman Catholics and Protestants, but also by Jews, Gentiles, and even by Mahomedans. The words are most universal, and are not necessarily applicable only to Christians.
.
Those who are arguing about multi-culturalism, etc, ought first try to understand that the Constitution was based upon it, albeit "racism" is part of the Constitution to prevent what the Framers of the Constitution held inferior races to take the job of australians.
.
Well, before politician open his/her mouth, we no longer have australian jobs as such protected, instead abuse of constitutional powers to the opposite.