So does that mean it's easy to get in as long as we're not Zog?

Awesome.. I can refrain from holding my arm out and yelling HEIL!!! for awhile..

Although personally I just think Beazley was trying to sound like he's just as "fair dinkum" as Howard and fighting for "Australianness", his ideas do have some merit.

New immigrants coming to Australia could at least be made aware of the way society functions here. Making a test out of it though is just nonsense. Just give them some presentations,  and try to make it clear to them this society functions the way it does and that you need to learn how to adapt to it.

But in the end, people are free to believe pretty much what they like in Australia fd, and you can't  change that, no matter how much you'd like to.

You need to understand though that there's a very fine line between mandatory acceptance of Australian values, and denying people political freedom. Otherwise opposition parties could soon be banned because their policies are the opposite of the rulings party.

If anyone who wants to change laws/values etc. becomes anti-Australian and an affront to Australian values, then pretty much all opposition parties will be out. Because they all seek in some way or another to modify those things..

Quote:


Beazley, get rid of mateship you clown. No wonder no-one took this seriously. I think democracy is more important than respect for our laws. If someone doesn't think democracy is the best form of government, don't let them in.

The equal treatment of women is an important one.

Quote:


Another good suggestion. It needs to be more than signing on on a bit of paper.

Quote:


Strawman.

Quote:


Abu I'm not trying to change what Australians believe with this. I think we should change who we let into this country, that's all.

Quote:


This is about denying them Australian citizenship, which I think is totally reasonable. It is not about denying citizens political freedom.

Quote:


That's a bit of a stretch Abu. It is a citizenship test. Valuing democracy is all about valuing the right of people to form opposition parties.

abu_rashid wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2009 at 9:38am:



Freedom of conscience is not feedom of action. And there is a mile, rather than a fine line, between accepting Australia values and freedom of political action. It is called treason.

The fine line is, rather, between dislike of and opposition to political islam and islamophobia
Like this example from Al-Canada shows:

Which side of the war would you like to be on? 
Old-fashioned types might think that those Britons - okay, make that "Britons" - helping to manufacture bombs for the Taliban are engaged in an act of treason. But, as a current court case in Quebec helps clarify, giving support to the Queen's enemies in their attempts to kill your compatriots is now just another vibrant, colourful manifestation of cultural diversity.
As the International Free Press Society notes, Said Namouh is on trial up north for aiding and abetting terrorism. The Crown charges that Mr Namouh distributed jihadist snuff videos, offered advice on bomb-making, volunteered his expertise for a planned truck bombing, and threatened governments (including Canada's) with troops in Afghanistan. Defence counsel René Duvall doesn't deny any of this, but says his client's enthusiasm for violent jihad is protected on grounds of freedom of religion and (mirthless chuckle from your humble typist) Canadians' cherished right to freedom of expression. As Maître Duvall put it outside the court, "Where do you draw the line?"

In fact, the line seems to be pretty clear: If a jihadist says he wants to kill Canadian troops, he's just exercising his right to freedom of religion. If I quote what he said in Canada's biggest-selling news weekly, we'll be charged with "flagrant Islamophobia" and hauled up in court.
[Mark Steyn]

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2009 at 10:50pm:


Perhaps we should look to Britain for an example.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/world/multiculturalism-policies-in-britain-a-failure-says-pm-david-cameron/story-e6frea9c-1226000767482

PRIME Minister David Cameron has condemned Britain's long-standing policy of multiculturalism as a failure, calling for better integration of young Muslims to combat home-grown extremism.

In a speech to the Munich Security Conference, Mr Cameron signalled a marked change in policy towards Britain's ethnic and religious minorities, saying the "hands-off tolerance" of those who reject Western values has failed.

He urged a "more active, muscular liberalism" where equal rights, the rule of law, freedom of speech and democracy are actively promoted to create a stronger national identity.

"If we are to defeat this threat, I believe it's time to turn the page on the failed policies of the past," he said.

It was Mr Cameron's first major speech on Islamist extremism, an issue of major concern for British governments ever since four home-grown suicide bombers attacked the London transport system in 2005, killing 52 people.

The Prime Minister, who took power last May, argued that "under the doctrine of state multiculturalism, we have encouraged different cultures to live separate lives, apart from each other and the mainstream".

He said this had resulted in a lack of national identity in Britain which had made some young Muslims turn to extremist ideology.

"Frankly, we need a lot less of the passive tolerance of recent years and much more active, muscular liberalism," Mr Cameron said.

"A passively tolerant society says to its citizens: as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone. It stands neutral between different values.

"A genuinely liberal country does much more. It believes in certain values and actively promotes them.... It says to its citizens: this is what defines us as a society."

Mr Cameron clearly distinguished between Islam the religion and the political ideology of Islamist extremism, saying they "are not the same thing".

But he argued that non-violent organisations which present themselves as a gateway to the Muslim community but are ambiguous on Western values should no longer receive state funding, and should be banned from university campuses.

His speech echoed controversial remarks made by German Chancellor Angela Merkel last year, when she also called multiculturalism a failure, saying Germany had not devoted enough attention to the integration of immigrants.

"What I mean to say is that for years, for decades, the approach was that integration was not something that needed to be addressed, that people would live side-by-side and that it would sort itself out," Ms Merkel said in November.

"This turned out to be false."

Abu you greasy toad if you don't want to live by our rules F**K off back to the slime hole you used to call home.

Ok, FD, now I'm sort of curious as to why you included Zionism with Nazism and Islamism??

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 12:28pm:

we need a drastic reduction in state power, control over our lives and ability to engage in futurism, long term economic planing and social engineering.  I am personally engaged in the fight to have my Tax File number deleted - are you?

freediver wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 12:29pm:


Huh??

freediver wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 1:03pm:


I agree completely...

I was just wondering if you're using "Secretly run the world" version of zionism....or the actual real meaning??

Agreed, there are two types of Zimunism, covert and overt.

Covert being the more dangerous of the two!

.....anything 'covert' is dangerous, this and isn't democratic.

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 1:11pm:



Not quite mellie, there ARE two types of Zionism 'mentioned' on the internet....

One is the 'overt' one....which is/was a 'political' position, from the 1890's up until today, which is simply support for the existence (and right to defence) of the country called Israel......This actually exists...


The 'covert' type has been 'made up' by paranoid loons who think there is a secret group of people, made up of rich, powerful people, who secretly make ALL the real decisions of every government every where and want to enslave all people on earth at the behest of which ever alien race is currently seeking to take over the world...


Basically, go read any of it_is_the_light's posts in the Spirituality thread....from Lord SaLuSa or one of the "LightSpeakers"....and you'll understand..

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 1:40pm:



Well that's kinda my point......'extreme' Zionism is sort of contradiction in terms (to my mind)....it's sort of like being an 'extreme Australianist'......

I can understand the idea of 'extreme' Judaism....because you see comments all the time, from the rabid Rabbis (and there are a fair few around) who want to kill or expell all non-jews from Israel etc....Or from extreme Islamists or Christians, who want to convert the world to their faith..

But how do you have an 'extreme' (Israel has a Right to Exist), idea???

It's like being an extreme Liberal/Labor/Green.....It's not really a threat to democracy is it??

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 2:14pm:


Yeah mellie....but Zionism is NOT related to Fascism...I know you might think so....but it's like trying to relate Nationalism to Communism.....chalk and cheese, it's quite the opposite

"Whitlam had a zero net immigration policy."
yes, and that's what it still should be.
j.

Quote:
-Giz

No, but it can be, this and can result in the same chequebook determined outcome where our policies are concerned.


Ie...the same pro-Israel Zionist development mob Gillards boyfriend was working for down in Melbourne up to and during the election made generous campaign donations to the ALP.

This and are also personal friends of the Rudds, having spent New Years with them the year before. David Koch is a personal friend of Rudd, and I don't have a problem with this, until it begins to demonstrate a degree of bias in our media.

So....


Yes 'Zionism' can take on fascist tones, in this context. Anything can really...religious group or otherwise..because it all comes down to $$$$.

On the whole, I really like Jewish people, I like their living values and standards, the clean way in which they live, and I especially like the way they place so much importance and value on their children's education, ..but like all groups, this has the potential to be disadvantageous when it comes to political funding also.

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 2:37pm:


LOL yes that's cute mellie.....BUT Zionism ISN'T a 'religious' concept...

"Zionism (Hebrew: ציונות‎, Tsiyonut) is primarily a nationalist or national liberation, Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland. Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish state and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to 1) non-political, Cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am; and 2) political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism"

Quote:
-By giz

It doesn't have to be, but they can and do use 'religion' to bankroll their political objectives,( under guise of saving Israel)  and donations generated from this is put towards funding political campaigns none the less, as has been demonstrated.

Quote:
by Giz?

Yes I do, but think this should extend to all Australians, not just some fortunate enough to have the right genetic composition.

Ie, save Israel vote Labor!!

This was the message being delivered to the Jewish community last election, some of their students were so annoyed with this they went public about it and were ostracised from their Jewish communities (one even lost his job as the editor for an online Jewish journal/newspaper)  for having told fellow Jewish students to vote for who they think they should vote for, not who their Rabbi tells them to vote for as per postal vote arrangement given elections fall on the Sabbath.

....  Not fascism you think?

Lol

Wakey wakey Giz.

Giz, when we start talking about "Religious/clerical fascism," we are talking about deep-politics, which can be somewhat like deep-space, a little unexplored and hypothesised in places, but it's getting there, this and I think it's definitely something worth exploring none the less.

Especially in light of how 'fascist' our country has become in recent years.

Australian political elections should be about what's best for our nation, predominantly, not be bankrolled by those with a vested political interest in another nations politics ie Israel.

Don't you think?

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 1:06pm:


I have no idea where it was from, but something I read at the time indicated that Zionism should be on the list.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 3:44pm:

...

Sorry, you have just crashed and burned,(lost the debate)  by implying I'm a bigot on account of my being opposed to all forms of 'fascism' when I have already made it clear this applies to all groups, religions, corps  donating and having too much instrumental input in Australian policy,...thus is a deal breaker Giz. Sorry.

Time you sat in the naughty corner with a dunce hat on your head.



Still, you had to give it a crack I guess...

It's about what's best for all, not just a few!

It cant be a fair and democratic process, when this process (power) only applies to a given group funding a chosen political campaign.

It's called purchased power, 'fascism' ...in a nutshell.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 4:04pm:


No, I quite like Jews, have not got a problem with them as individuals what so ever, however I do have a problem with any group, corp, purchasing political advantage by way of making generous donations to political partys.

OK.

And this applies to all religious groups and corps, for I couldn't give a fig who or what they are, thus would like to see political donations stopped all together.  They should have an even playing field, this and be able to sell themselves and their policies to their 'own' nations people, in accordance to merit, not generous political campaign funding donated by a few.

Our nations political donations are some of the least transparent and dishonest in the world.

This needs to change as it interferes with the fair working process of democracy this and makes way for fascism.

We need to start practising what we preach, in the way of 'true' democracy, especially when preaching to less developed nations in pursuit of freedom.

  Do as we say, but not as we do?

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 4:10pm:



No, I quite like Jews, have not got a problem with them as individuals

NO mellie, you don't...that is quite clear...you might 'like' jewish people...,but you actually HATE 'jews'.....There really IS a difference...

It's sort of like a guy saying 'I like a girl', but I hate 'women'....or (to make a point that you'll understand) I 'like' individual AFL Players, but hate St Kilda players....Much the same thing...

You 'may' like 'individual' jewish people...but YOU hate JEWS, as a class....

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 4:21pm:

Yes, I'm absolutely in 'a tiz'....But then I always get annoyed by people who 'pretend' to like 'people' as individuals but hate the same people as a 'group'....

I react the same way to bigots who say 'I like the black next door' but hate black people.....The idea is this...IF you hate a 'class'.....like YOU do with jewish people..what reason do I have to believe that you like the 'jew' next door???

ALL jewish people (or any other group) are basically the same...You either treat ALL members of that group the same( as individuals, like some or hate some, depending on the PERSONS behaviour) OR you make a 'blanket' statement ( I hate ALL people of that religion/colour/sexual preference, etc)...YOU can't do both...You can EITHER treat everyone as an individual (i.e, everyone is different, so I like 'fred' but not 'steve', based on fred or steve's attitude) OR you can say ALL people of 'Fred' or Steve's religion/race are less than human...

You can't have it both ways...

I like them because like me, they are misers, and a tad 'bookish'... this and hate TV.

(excuse my stereotyping them, but I actually respect these traits)

Come off it Giz, do you really think favourably of fascism in this country?

freediver wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 3:50pm:


How is  equating Zionism with fascism about Australian immigration policy?

freediver wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 3:50pm:


Not for me to fathom how your mind works.

Equating zionism with fascism,. however, is a new trope, cultivated and amplified by islamists and nazis. Your including zionism with islamism and nazism is a sign of being tricked, though, into mindless reflexes characteristic of nazis and islamists.

Australia needs skilled migrants, that fact is undeniable.

What it needs to do is set a preference of skilled workers from culturally suitable nations in the Commonwealth.

My father from the UK and mother from RSA being prime examples of what we need more of. End a sentence in a preposition, go and stand in the corner yes I know.

Actually Mellie have you noticed how many Union leaders in Australia have British accents????

The clearout of the dead wood by Mrs T in the 1980s when she turned the country around, looks like they all cleared out and went to Australia!!!

Soren wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 5:34pm:


I did not equate the two Soren. Mentioning two ideologies in the same sentence is not the same thing as equating them.

Soren it really would be simpler for all concerned if you addressed what I actually said rather than what you think I think.

Double digit unemployment in the US due to housing collapse , high unemployment in UK .. those people with many skills and speaking the same language and would like to come here for jobs .. but i bet they would have no chances .. as jobs only available for the third world ..

Quote:


Maybe doing away with Britain's long-standing policy of persecuting her Muslim population would work better.

freediver wrote on Feb 21^st, 2011 at 9:57pm:


More likely that they were being intensely-persecuted in their new home - as has been the case since that fateful day of 'shock and awe' when the bomb-in-the-backpack mob purportedly managed to hijack several planes on US soil and proceeded to use them as missiles...

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 9:40pm:


thinkin' 'bout it????
it's already out of hand.
j.

mellie wrote on Feb 6^th, 2011 at 6:01pm:


you bet it is.
j.

Quote:


Not quite, but when a section of the community becomes disenfranchised, it breeds frustration and anger. Angry kids are susceptible to people who'd like to take advantage of that.

Equitist wrote on Feb 21^st, 2011 at 10:11pm:


You are unsurprisingly daft and muddle-headed. You'd say anything just to maintain that carefully crafted persona...

How exactly are they persecuted in their new homes?

Silly bint? Is that a step up or down from useful idiot?

That success story you pasted highlights the hard work of the Muslim themselves. It doesn't mention the internment of Iraqi citizens in Britain during the first Gulf War or the mass opposition toward government funding of Islamic schools.

Quote:


http://jos.sagepub.com.ezproxy.library.uq.edu.au/content/43/1/61.full.pdf+html

Oh yeah. That's great.

the alps immigration policy .................

"keep them out and let them in."

leftwaddedness

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2011 at 10:21am:


Step up, it seems... Or is it down??
Anyway - Scott Poynting? Couldn't you find any Chomsky or Pilger?

LoL..Meekathara.Meekathara.Meekathara.Meekathara.Meekathara

I just happened across this poll on the Lib-allied Menzies House web-site - and (even allowing for the curious wording of the question) the results might surprise everyone on here...

http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/

Equitist wrote on Feb 21^st, 2011 at 10:11pm:


They blew up the busses to make a political point - because they disagreed with the government's foreign policy. They were not victims, and it is absurdly naive to assume they must be victims in order to do something so evil.

Annie Anthrax wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2011 at 9:43am:


And blowing up busses? I know plenty of disenfranchised, frustrated, angry Aussies. I don't see them committing mass murder. Are you suggesting that busses blowing up is inevitable if local Muslims don't get what they want?

freediver wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 10:13pm:



Maybe they are intensely persecuted because they blow up buses when they don't get their way.

It's only the islamics (muslims) who oppose our free western athiest capitalistic democracy.

Free democracy is incompatable with islam (muslims)

athiest capitalistic democracies are the most advanced countried in the world.
islam contains the most retarded nations.

Lisa Jones wrote on Feb 28^th, 2011 at 9:24am:

Money

falah wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 2:40pm:




Nice try Falah. So tell us, does it prohibit voting by non-Muslims?

10/1?
3/1?
White girls hooking up with chinese men in anything approaching significant numbers?

I LOL @ U

falah wrote on May 31^st, 2012 at 2:40pm:


Watch Falah dodge some simple questions about Islam and democracy:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1226714182/88#88