Asylum immigrants - Green Light

[trainspotter]

definitively not lacking here, even worse, cashed up bogans until the end of the mining boom....
My new family....

Points !

 

[luutzu]

The Death of the Most Generous Nation on Earth

Little Sweden has taken in far more refugees per capita than any country in Europe. But in doing so, it’s tearing itself apart.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/02/10...-nation-on-earth-sweden-syria-refugee-europe/

The article is a hack job.

So Sweden took in thousands of refugees during and after WW2; it also took in tens of thousands of refugees in the 1980s and '90s - including more than 100,000 Bosnians.

All of these refugees have contribute positively to Sweden - in politics, healthcare and just good neighbours.

But. But this journalist is saying the current Syrians and Iraqis are different.

How different?

Less educated; follow a less tolerant version of Islam?

Seriously?

And the journalism get worst...

Eritreans are hardly refugees because the country is at peace - but the warlords there are drafting soldiers and so those who can ran away. But the warlords have a good plan: they let those who escape go and then send their tax collectors over later to collect the earnings - hence ensuring the flow from Eritrea. wtf?

Or this... Afghans who flee from Afghanistan then flee to Sweden "claiming" refugee status because Iran forced them to fight in Syria and they don't want to.

Refugee advocates have said the same thing as these Afghans, but that's impossible. Why impossible? Because Iran is Shiites and Afghans are Sunnis, and Shiites will never hand a gun to Sunnis to go kill other Sunnis in Syria. But "nevertheless", a recent Human Rights Watch report found that Iranians did pay some Afghan refugees to fight in Syria and threaten to deport those who refuse.

This idiot is a journalist? He just quote reports and experts confirming claims of refugees - then deny those report based on his hunch about Shiites and Sunnies.

Wow.

 

[sptrawler]

The article is a hack job.

So Sweden took in thousands of refugees during and after WW2; it also took in tens of thousands of refugees in the 1980s and '90s - including more than 100,000 Bosnians.

All of these refugees have contribute positively to Sweden - in politics, healthcare and just good neighbours.

But. But this journalist is saying the current Syrians and Iraqis are different.

How different?

Less educated; follow a less tolerant version of Islam?

Seriously?

And the journalism get worst...

Eritreans are hardly refugees because the country is at peace - but the warlords there are drafting soldiers and so those who can ran away. But the warlords have a good plan: they let those who escape go and then send their tax collectors over later to collect the earnings - hence ensuring the flow from Eritrea. wtf?

.

Don't you think the intolerance, is due to the more active pursuits, of Islamic motivated people?

I'm quite sure, if a lot of people who blew themselves and others up in foriegn Countries, said they were Aussie militants and doing it for the loss of trade.

Aussies would become a subject of increasing scrutiny? Or do you think it wouldn't matter, because some are white and christian.LOL

 

[luutzu]

My trouble Luutzu is that you consider not the country but the world as your family,
and so assume that each human deserve to be treated in the same way;
we already touched this subject.
Many people do, by ignorance, bias due to own experience that is extrapolated to the current migrants (and I would see you there) or just naive lala land people
Whereas I extend my family to my country only (here, Australia) and stops there (it does not even include my birthplace).
I do place a value to the belonging to a country, not the aussie oie oie oie or the drapped flag od the drunks at New Year eve, but the land, the history, and the belonging.This is my family.

Every illegal migrant is a cost, a burden and a danger to my " family" and so it is my duty to fight them off.That summarises it quite well, you will also add an experience that few here have of the effect and cohabitation with radical muslims.This as a result of a string of policies O/S mostly mirrored here with a 20y delay-
So my presence here spending some time on this thread: but i can not convince Basilio or Luutzu, I know that.

Serious?

Some humans are more human than others? Some should be treated different to others?

Maybe Australia would be a better place if we, instead of placing value on the land or the flag, put those values on justice and equality and moral duties and obligation to fellow Man.

Maybe that is also the spirit of what it meant to be an Australian.

Why is an "illegal" migrant a cost but a legal migrant not a cost or a threat?

First of all, refugees are not "illegal". International Law and treaties, of which Australia is a signatory to, give those who claim asylum the legal rights to make that claim.

That is, no asylum seekers breaks any law when they enter a country and apply for asylum.

Second, research have shown that the financial costs spent on refugees are paid back by that refugee within 20 years, easy.

Before that payback period, the country and the community benefits a great deal. One being jobs for community service people; low-wage jobs in isolated communities no Australians want to do etc. etc. been through this.

-------------

I know a few families, literally of the same parents and siblings... The family whose parents are decent and generous tend to have children who are also more generous and kind.

The family whose parent/s are nasty, greedy, selfish... their kids are ones you'd better not turn your back on. Heck, their own parents couldn't honestly trust them.

Why is that?

It is very hard to be "good". Being good tend to "waste" your time; make your poorer; put you at risk of being used and abused... and you cannot at all take advantage of people.

That is why many, not all, many, of those who get rich does so because they don't care about anyone or anything else.

So when parents or spouse encourage or demonstrate the advantage of caring for oneself and screw whoever you can and suck up to whoever has money and power... well the ones I know tend to be surprised when their spouse or their kids turn around and screw them too.

Yea, good luck with tell friends and family to only screw other people but not you or those you care about.

 

[luutzu]

Don't you think the intolerance, is due to the more active pursuits, of Islamic motivated people?

No.

Intolerance, prejudice, discrimination and just all kind of stuff depend on the person. It is not an Islamic thing.

Not even terrorism.

 

[sptrawler]

No.

Intolerance, prejudice, discrimination and just all kind of stuff depend on the person. It is not an Islamic thing.

Not even terrorism.

That's nonsense, I came to Australia as a kid 8 years old, I came from a Country that had huge religious discrimination issues.
When I arrived the religious issue weren't prevalent here,you had to fight to gain acceptance, but it finally came.

What we have now is people coming to foreign countries and not wanting to accept a neutral stance on religion.

They want to accept the offerings of a welfare state, yet create havoc to destroy that state.

That may not seem fair but it it is accurate, as they are perpetrating acts of violence in the name of their religion, in their adopted Countries.

It, IMO, is impossible to reconcile that it is justified.

You can sugar it up and bless it it in a million ways, in the end it is just a $hitty act, that reflects badly on the rest of the genuine people.IMO

 

[luutzu]

That's nonsense, I came to Australia as a kid 8 years old, I came from a Country that had huge religious discrimination issues.
When I arrived the religious issue weren't prevalent here,you had to fight to gain acceptance, but it finally came.

What we have now is people coming to foreign countries and not wanting to accept a neutral stance on religion.

They want to accept the offerings of a welfare state, yet create havoc to destroy that state.

That may not seem fair but it it is accurate, as they are perpetrating acts of violence in the name of their religion, in their adopted Countries.

It, IMO, is impossible to reconcile that it is justified.

You can sugar it up and bless it it in a million ways, in the end it is just a $hitty act, that reflects badly on the rest of the genuine people.IMO

If Muslims are violent extremists because of Islam, why aren't there daily terrorist attack in Australia?

If Islam is evil and Muslims are more violent than others, how come there aren't more crimes and violence among Muslims than other ethnic groups?

So the argument that Islam is intolerant and Muslims are therefore bad and ill suited to civilized living... if that is true we'd be seeing prisons full of Muslim criminals.

So logic and factual, as well as historical and current events does not show Muslims to be any more violent or extremist or terrorising than any other group of people.

Let's pick the Chinese. All they do, it seem, is buying property and opening restaurants and accounting business right?

If Australia or the West starts to bomb China or take out Chinese "terrorists"... How do you reckon the Chinese community will react? How will some member of that community will react?

I'm not excusing terrorism or violence. What I am saying is that if people feel that "their people" or their religion are being killed and stepped on... some will resort to violence, or could be incited to act of violence.

If any of us are Muslims and read the news, we'd be pretty upset at how our religion and our culture and people are being treated.


If we, non-Muslims, buy this bs about clash of civilisation and Islam being an evil cult and Muslims terrorists... you know what that really mean?

It mean a YES to go over there and bomb and drone them. Make the world safer and all that nonsense.

So millions of people in the ME have died; tends of millions displaced and are homeless; generations more will be lost and live through the consequences of modern war and its chemicals... and we just shrugged and not question too much whether an entire people deserve that.

But say the world is harsh and it's better to be safe than sorry - even if innocents must die to get one terrorist; or an entire country must be at war to overthrow a dictator who might fund terrorist...

Are we safer today?

Are our economy stronger?

Are our people richer?

The Iraqi War is estimated to have cost the US around $7 trillion dollars end of this year or so. Afghanistan will cost around $3Trillion.

When Libya was being bombed to free its people, the first day of bombing cost the alliance around $500 million in cruise missiles.

On and on...

Who wear these financial costs? What about blowbacks? Enhanced anti-terrorism expenses?

The homeland and its people will fork up the cash or forgo the necessary investment and maintenance... keep it up longer and other powers will rise up and dominate.


Sun Tzu said, there has never been an instance of a state having benefited from protracted warfare.

15 years and counting in the ME. The ME has not only gotten worst with there's no end in sight, the wars are also expanding.

Add to that the current fights with Russia; the potential conflict or appeasement with China...

Add to that the privatisation of public assets, the daily funnelling of public wealth to private cliques of amoral, disloyal multinational corporations and international capitalists with money being their only obligation and loyalty to.

Read up on how empires fell and see if we fit the pattern.

 

[sptrawler]

If Muslims are violent extremists because of Islam, why aren't there daily terrorist attack in Australia?

If Islam is evil and Muslims are more violent than others, how come there aren't more crimes and violence among Muslims than other ethnic groups?

So the argument that Islam is intolerant and Muslims are therefore bad and ill suited to civilized living... if that is true we'd be seeing prisons full of Muslim criminals.

So logic and factual, as well as historical and current events does not show Muslims to be any more violent or extremist or terrorising than any other group of people.

Let's pick the Chinese. All they do, it seem, is buying property and opening restaurants and accounting business right?

If Australia or the West starts to bomb China or take out Chinese "terrorists"... How do you reckon the Chinese community will react? How will some member of that community will react?

I'm not excusing terrorism or violence. What I am saying is that if people feel that "their people" or their religion are being killed and stepped on... some will resort to violence, or could be incited to act of violence.

If any of us are Muslims and read the news, we'd be pretty upset at how our religion and our culture and people are being treated.


If we, non-Muslims, buy this bs about clash of civilisation and Islam being an evil cult and Muslims terrorists... you know what that really mean?

It mean a YES to go over there and bomb and drone them. Make the world safer and all that nonsense.

So millions of people in the ME have died; tends of millions displaced and are homeless; generations more will be lost and live through the consequences of modern war and its chemicals... and we just shrugged and not question too much whether an entire people deserve that.

But say the world is harsh and it's better to be safe than sorry - even if innocents must die to get one terrorist; or an entire country must be at war to overthrow a dictator who might fund terrorist...

Are we safer today?

Are our economy stronger?

Are our people richer?

The Iraqi War is estimated to have cost the US around $7 trillion dollars end of this year or so. Afghanistan will cost around $3Trillion.

When Libya was being bombed to free its people, the first day of bombing cost the alliance around $500 million in cruise missiles.

On and on...

Who wear these financial costs? What about blowbacks? Enhanced anti-terrorism expenses?

The homeland and its people will fork up the cash or forgo the necessary investment and maintenance... keep it up longer and other powers will rise up and dominate.


Sun Tzu said, there has never been an instance of a state having benefited from protracted warfare.

15 years and counting in the ME. The ME has not only gotten worst with there's no end in sight, the wars are also expanding.

Add to that the current fights with Russia; the potential conflict or appeasement with China...

Add to that the privatisation of public assets, the daily funnelling of public wealth to private cliques of amoral, disloyal multinational corporations and international capitalists with money being their only obligation and loyalty to.

Read up on how empires fell and see if we fit the pattern.

I understand what you say, but there are extremist issues happening, the press is restricted on what it can print re race and religion.

I'm not saying the refugees are causing the majority of the problems, I think drugs are the root cause.

However there is an obvious new leaning toward violent crime, that has traits, of refugee origins by their nature.

There is always a place for migrants who want to further the Countries fortune and their own, but we don't have the capacity to adopt more lifetime welfare recipients. From the news reports I read there is a huge problem with African gangs in the Northern Melbourne suburbs.

I know in a Perth suburb, the soccer club was treed, by a group of African guys.

Note I didn't mention religion.

However, if you want to mention religion, are we safer. NO

Do you worry about flying on an airline based in a Muslim Country? Yes.

Do you worry about visiting a Country with a high concentration of Muslim refugees? Yes

 

[trainspotter]

If Muslims are violent extremists because of Islam, why aren't there daily terrorist attack in Australia?

If Islam is evil and Muslims are more violent than others, how come there aren't more crimes and violence among Muslims than other ethnic groups? Watched the news (globally) lately luutzu?

So the argument that Islam is intolerant and Muslims are therefore bad and ill suited to civilized living... if that is true we'd be seeing prisons full of Muslim criminals.

So logic and factual, as well as historical and current events does not show Muslims to be any more violent or extremist or terrorising than any other group of people.

Hmmmm last time I looked "Johnno's double plugger thong blue singlet brigade" was not listed as a terrorist group?

Abu Sayyaf Group
Listed 14 November 2002, re-listed 5 November 2004, 3 November 2006, 1 November 2008, 29 October 2010 and 12 July 2013
Al-Murabitun
Listed 5 November 2014
Al-Qa'ida (AQ)
Listed 21 October 2002, re-listed 1 September 2004, 26 August 2006, 8 August 2008, 22 July 2010 and 12 July 2013
Al-Qa'ida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)
Listed 26 November 2010, re-listed 26 November 2013
Al-Qa'ida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)
Listed 14 November 2002, re-listed 5 November 2004, 3 November 2006, 9 August 2008, 22 July 2010 and 12 July 2013
Al-Shabaab
Listed 22 August 2009, re-listed 18 August 2012 and 11 August 2015
Ansar al-Islam
Formerly known as Ansar al-Sunna””Listed 27 March 2003, re-listed 27 March 2005, 24 March 2007, 14 March 2009, 9 March 2012 and 3 March 2015.
Boko Haram
Listed 26 June 2014.
Hamas' Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades
Listed 9 November 2003, re-listed 5 June 2005, 7 October 2005, 10 September 2007, 8 September 2009, 18 August 2012 and 11 August 2015
Hizballah's External Security Organisation (ESO)
Listed 5 June 2003, re-listed 5 June 2005, 25 May 2007, 16 May 2009, 10 May 2012 and 2 May 2015.
Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
Listed 11 April 2003, re-listed 11 April 2005, 31 March 2007, 14 March 2009, 9 March 2012 and 15 March 2015.
Islamic State
Formerly listed as Al-Qa’ida in Iraq””2 March 2005, re-listed 17 February 2007, 1 November 2008, 29 October 2010, 12 July 2013. Formerly listed as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant on 14 December 2013. Listed 11 July 2014 as Islamic State.
Jabhat al-Nusra
Listed 28 June 2013
Jaish-e-Mohammed
Listed 11 April 2003, re-listed 11 April 2005, 31 March 2007, 14 March 2009, 9 March 2012 and 3 March 2015.
Jamiat ul-Ansar
Formerly known as Harakat Ul-Mujahideen””Listed 14 November 2002, re-listed 5 November 2004, 3 November 2006, 1 November 2008, 29 October 2010 and 12 July 2013
Jemaah Islamiyah (JI)
Listed 27 October 2002, re-listed 1 September 2004, 26 August 2006, 9 August 2008, 22 July 2010 and 12 July 2013
Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK)
Listed 17 December 2005, re-listed 28 September 2007, 8 September 2009, 18 August 2012 and 11 August 2015
Lashkar-e Jhangvi
Listed 11 April 2003, re-listed 11 April 2005, 31 March 2007, 14 March 2009, 9 March 2012 and 3 March 2015.
Lashkar-e-Tayyiba
Listed 9 November 2003, re-listed 5 June 2005, 7 October 2005, 8 September 2007, 8 September 2009, 18 August 2012 and 11 August 2015
Palestinian Islamic Jihad
Listed 3 May 2004, re-listed 5 June 2005, 7 October 2005, 8 September 2007, 8 September 2009, 18 August 2012 and 11 August 2015

https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Listedterroristorganisations/Pages/default.aspx

Because we have them under watch luutzu ... remember the Cronulla riots??

Try Google for instance PULEEEEEZE !




Don't forget the Koran ...



No wait it is all right now because it is happening in another country https://www.rt.com/news/345782-koran-hagia-sophia-greece/

Ummm Muslim is evil and more violent than others? You betcha it is ...

Islamic terrorism is, by definition, terrorist acts committed by Muslim groups or individuals who profess Islamic or Islamist motivations or goals. Islamic terrorists justify their violent tactics by selectively citing Quran and Hadith and interpreting these scriptures according to their own goals and intentions.[1][2]

The highest numbers of incidents and fatalities caused by Islamic terrorism occur in the middle east, mainly Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria.[3] In recent decades, such incidents have occurred on a global scale, affecting not only Muslim-majority states in Africa and Asia, but also Europe, Russia, and the United States. Such attacks have targeted Muslims and non-Muslims.[4] In a number of the worst-affected Muslim-majority regions, these terrorists have been met by armed, independent resistance groups,[5] state actors and their proxies, and politically liberal Muslim protesters.[6]

Although the literal existence of Islamic terrorism is not disputed, some have criticized what they perceive to be the blanket usage of the term. Such use in Western political speech has variously been called "counter-productive," "unhelpful," "highly politicized, intellectually contestable" and "damaging to community relations."[7] This view, in turn, has been criticized by those who perceive it to be an act of evasion.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

Ohhhhhh we are not allowed to call a spade a spade anymore. FECKORF .. this is Australia mate !

Lindt' Cafe anyone anyone ??

 

[SirRumpole]

Second, research have shown that the financial costs spent on refugees are paid back by that refugee within 20 years, easy.

Could you give some references to that research ?

Is it from a refugee aid agency ?

Last time I looked most refugees were still on the dole after 5 years. Then we have Somalians running amok in Melbourne plus the terrorists (a small minority but still a threat).

 

[qldfrog]

Could you give some references to that research ?

Is it from a refugee aid agency ?

Last time I looked most refugees were still on the dole after 5 years. Then we have Somalians running amok in Melbourne plus the terrorists (a small minority but still a threat).

As per usual Luutzu based his history on his past experience, I have no doubt whatsoever that the greek,italian, lebanese christians, coopts, vietnamese, or some of the yougoslavs (sp?) migrants who moved here were a key positive asset to Australia, it will be a different matter for the bunch we are talking about;
2 to 3 generations later in France, they have collapsed the system.
Learn from history not all refugees are the same but for that to sink in.....

 

[Tisme]

The Mullahs have been very methodical in forcing mass migration and with it the seeds of their future caliphates.

Simply put the bosses of the mindless drones are looking for fertile fields to impoverish and de-educate just for the hell of it.

 

[luutzu]

Could you give some references to that research ?

Is it from a refugee aid agency ?

Last time I looked most refugees were still on the dole after 5 years. Then we have Somalians running amok in Melbourne plus the terrorists (a small minority but still a threat).

I posted the study last year. From Australian Refugee Council, or something like that.

From memory, they found that within 15 or 20 years, on average a refugee would start their own business or be full time employed and would have paid enough taxes and financial contribution to have completely repaid the financial expenses the gov't have given them by then.

There was an article last year or so about some country town in Victoria economically benefited from having refugees settled there. From having labour intensive jobs, or just having jobs, filled by refugees that otherwise wouldn't have been filled because most Australian there go to the cities etc.

Such stories are in line with the study. My own family's experience, and those refugees I know growing up are in line with that study's findings.

 

[SirRumpole]

I posted the study last year. From Australian Refugee Council, or something like that.

From memory, they found that within 15 or 20 years, on average a refugee would start their own business or be full time employed and would have paid enough taxes and financial contribution to have completely repaid the financial expenses the gov't have given them by then.

There was an article last year or so about some country town in Victoria economically benefited from having refugees settled there. From having labour intensive jobs, or just having jobs, filled by refugees that otherwise wouldn't have been filled because most Australian there go to the cities etc.

Such stories are in line with the study. My own family's experience, and those refugees I know growing up are in line with that study's findings.

Yes, but you aren't burdened with an archaic, debilitating religious dogma that sucks the life out of work ethics and promotes a hatred of anything that doesn't conform to that dogma.


As the frog said, not all refugees or immigrants are the same, they have to be judged on their own merits.

 

[luutzu]

As per usual Luutzu based his history on his past experience, I have no doubt whatsoever that the greek,italian, lebanese christians, coopts, vietnamese, or some of the yougoslavs (sp?) migrants who moved here were a key positive asset to Australia, it will be a different matter for the bunch we are talking about;
2 to 3 generations later in France, they have collapsed the system.
Learn from history not all refugees are the same but for that to sink in.....

Maybe France is collapsing because of Austerity and other neocon economic policies of gutting workers pay and rights.

I know it might be hard to believe, but the country we grew up in may not be the same country it is now - that the laws and regulations, the rights and industries it used to have, and made it strong... may have been gutted; the wealth of the nation may have been shifted and stolen... and it is not by the refugees or Muslims.

Didn't France have a whole bunch of union strikes in recent weeks? Even the riot police are striking right? The pilot/airline unions also strike; truck drivers etc. etc.

Did the refugees cause the gov't to be harsher on French workers? Did they tell Hollande to rip up France's worker protection laws and make it easier for businesses to fire and lower wages acceptable?

So it might be the case that you are blaming the poor for being poor because they have no money. That while ignoring the possibility that they are poor because they are not being paid enough; that they are being taken advantage of; that opportunities are not there anymore.

And if the native have to compete with barely literate refugees for jobs (and losing), the disadvantages and economy is already in a hole long before refugees "steal their jobs".

 

[luutzu]

Hmmmm last time I looked "Johnno's double plugger thong blue singlet brigade" was not listed as a terrorist group?



https://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Listedterroristorganisations/Pages/default.aspx

Because we have them under watch luutzu ... remember the Cronulla riots??

Try Google for instance PULEEEEEZE !

View attachment 67045


Don't forget the Koran ...

View attachment 67046

No wait it is all right now because it is happening in another country https://www.rt.com/news/345782-koran-hagia-sophia-greece/

Ummm Muslim is evil and more violent than others? You betcha it is ...



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_terrorism

Ohhhhhh we are not allowed to call a spade a spade anymore. FECKORF .. this is Australia mate !

Lindt' Cafe anyone anyone ??

If a Muslim is a terrorist, call him a terrorist.. and beat him up too if we can.

No one is saying that Muslims are all saintly people.

Lindt' cafe' wasn't a terrorist attack. It was a hostage situation with a Muslim criminal who was about to serve prison and thought to attach himself to some "cause" because he can't kill himself.

----

I was referring to Muslims in Australia and in countries not currently at war or being blown up or invaded.

That if Islam and Muslims are just terrorists and uncommonly evil and nasty, you'd see more of them blowing stuff up and killing people or otherwise over represented in the maximum security prisons.

As for acts of terrorism overseas in the ME... it's called asymmetric warfare. Give both sides proper drones and jets and their terrorism will all be the same.

Whatever our politics, it is a bit much to blame people for not liking their country being invaded with foreign armies stationing on their ancestors' land. With a few night raids and collateral damages here and there, everywhere.

Yea, what's up with Islam and Muslims in the ME for being so angry man.

 

[luutzu]

Yes, but you aren't burdened with an archaic, debilitating religious dogma that sucks the life out of work ethics and promotes a hatred of anything that doesn't conform to that dogma.


As the frog said, not all refugees or immigrants are the same, they have to be judged on their own merits.

While I don't have research to prove it, I bet that Muslims who flee their homeland are not the crazy religious type we believe.

First, history have shown that Islam and Muslim in the ME were very "mild" (for lack of a better word). They were progressive and liberal and their gov't was secular and democratic. As was Iran before the US/CIA overthrow its secular and democratic president, replaced with the Shah, who was the weakest and least able son of his father's, who were then overthrown by the current Theocratic clerics.

Same with Egypt; Afghanistan I think was the work of the Soviets but the US did train the Taliban and what later became Al Qaeda.

So when imperial policies require the installation of dictators or strongman as puppets, the rule tend to drive people towards religious fanaticism with no hope for secular or democratic "values".

That and when you see the puppet master being "democratic", you tend to think that democracy might not be so good.


Second, those who are fanatics and extremely religious tend not to flee to the land of the infidels. It just doesn't work like that.

When South VN fell, a lot of VNese fisherman and farmers along the deltas did not rush off and leave. They even pulled back boats they see fleeing - betraying the Motherland and all that.


So while they might be too religious for our taste, is it violent? Is it criminal? If it is then our laws are there to take care of it. Otherwise, freedom means people can practise and believe in whatever right?

 

[SirRumpole]

Otherwise, freedom means people can practise and believe in whatever right?

Up to a point. Islam is imposed and ruled by violence. If a girl marries out of her religion she can be killed. Girls can be forced into arranged marriages. Boys are bought up to believe they are superior to infidels and women.

Islam is a pernicious culture that is contrary to our secular laws and a threat to democracy if it's allowed to get too big.

And Australia already has enough people. We have to keep borrowing money indefinitely to pay for schools, hospitals, roads, bridges etc just to accommodate what comes in from approved migration programs.

Enough is enough.

 

[luutzu]

Up to a point. Islam is imposed and ruled by violence. If a girl marries out of her religion she can be killed. Girls can be forced into arranged marriages. Boys are bought up to believe they are superior to infidels and women.

Islam is a pernicious culture that is contrary to our secular laws and a threat to democracy if it's allowed to get too big.

And Australia already has enough people. We have to keep borrowing money indefinitely to pay for schools, hospitals, roads, bridges etc just to accommodate what comes in from approved migration programs.

Enough is enough.

All religion is a threat to secular democracy.

Gay marriage is still an issue in Australia and most of the enlightened democracies. Abortion or contraception... ask a religious Christian or a priest what they think of it.

There isn't that much difference between the three Abrahamic religion.

If we, say, follow the teachings of Christianity to the letter, there won't be any scientific advances and heretics will be locked up or burnt. But that's another topic.


And no, if any ethnic group or culture gets too big, it still does not threaten democracy or western values.

The world has never been ruled or run by the majority anyway. So even if half the population are Muslims, if wealth is control by non-Muslims, then it will be the "values" of those with money and power that controls and run the country.

That is why most policies, anywhere, tend to favour the ruling elite. They never, rarely, for the benefit of the masses.

Look at the US... studies have shown that for the bottom 90% of Americans, their opinions and wishes don't count.
-----

I think Australia is up there with the biggest countries having the smallest population.

It's no exaggeration that a country this size with 24M people won't stand much of a chance if a rising power decides to take it. And they will if our big brother is weakened or otherwise occupied with other ventures. So unless we're prepared to nuke the enemy (and risk being nuked ourselves)... you'd want more people on your side.

 

[SirRumpole]

And no, if any ethnic group or culture gets too big, it still does not threaten democracy or western values.

Sorry, I have to disagree there.

There are places in the UK that want Sharia Law introduced so they can punish people for so called religious crimes.

That's the way they enforce their will because they know that unless they do people will drift away from Islam just as they are drifting away from Christianity.