Australia: Discrimination AGAINST white Males to be legalised

While you were sleeping.

Labor's "Fresh Thinking" and "Time for Change"

Discrimination against white males will soon be encouraged

Susie O'Brien
Herald Sun
December 09, 2008 12:00am

DISCRIMINATION against dominant white males will soon be encouraged in a bid to boost the status of women, the disabled and cultural and religious minorities.

Such positive discrimination -- treating people differently in order to obtain equality for marginalised groups - is set to be legalised under planned changes to the Equal Opportunity Act foreshadowed last week by state Attorney-General Rob Hulls.


The laws are also expected to protect the rights of people with criminal records to get a job, as long as their past misdeeds are irrelevant to work being sought.

Equal Opportunity Commission CEO Dr Helen Szoke said males had "been the big success story in business and goods and services".

"Clearly, they will have their position changed because they will be competing in a different way with these people who have been traditionally marginalised," she said.

"Let's open it up so everyone can have a fair go."

Victoria's peak business body expressed concern yesterday about the need for the proposed laws, and questioned if they would undermine the right of companies to make legitimate business decisions.

At present, individuals or bodies wanting to single out any race or gender for special treatment must gain an exemption from VCAT.

Companies and public bodies accused of discrimination can only be held to account after a complaint has been made.

But the proposed changes go much further, allowing the commission to inquire into discrimination, seize documents and search and enter premises after attempts to bring about change have failed.

Businesses and individuals would be required to change their ways even if a complaint had not been received.

Action could be taken where an unlawful act was "likely to occur", not just in cases where discrimination has taken place.

The commission would also have real teeth to enforce its rulings via VCAT and, as a last resort, in the courts.

The changes, shown in a Department of Justice report by former public advocate Julian Gardner, would also:

EDUCATE people so they know their rights.

GIVE more protection to people with disabilities, requiring companies and public entities to reasonably accommodate their needs.

GRANT the homeless and people who act as volunteers better protection from discrimination.

Victorian Employers' Chamber of Commerce and Industry workplace general manager David Gregory said business supported the objectives of equal opportunity legislation.

"But I am concerned and curious about whether these changes mean the commission can second-guess the legitimate business decisions of individual businesses," he said.

The first raft of changes to the Equal Opportunity Act were introduced into Parliament last week.

The Victorian Labor Party & VCAT's "finest hour" was when their Sharia Law inspired Star Chamber persecuted two evangelical Pastors Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot.
Cases like these show why the Left / International Socialists / United Nations work so closely with, and facilitate the imposition of Islam via Islamic Terrorism, they have a rabid mad dog they are able to let off the chain to do their dirty work, all the while excusing their mad dogs behavior by demanding tolerance and understanding of such barbarism, under the threat of legal sanction been imposed upon their mad dogs victims.

Australia has never had so many laws against it's citizens freedom of speech, all at the hands of the Australian Labor Party and their various cabals of leftist sub branches eg the various environmental / human / animal rights organizations.

Just like Obama and the US Democrats, their Australian Comrades led by Kevin 07 Rudd, did promise "Change" and "Fresh Thinking"

Salt Shakers

The most high-profile case in Australia is that involving Daniel Scot, Danny Nalliah and Catch the Fire Ministries. When they ran a seminar on Islam in 2002, the Islamic Council of Victoria made a complaint against them under Victoria's Racial and Religious Tolerance Act.

Five years later, in June 2007, the case was finally resolved. We have documented this case fully on our News pages. Click here to read more about this important case.

Use the tabs at the left to view particular cases or countries.

Author: Jenny Stokes | Modified: 28 July 2008

Muslim bigots impose blasphemy laws on Victoria

Gerard Jackson
BrookesNews.Com
Monday 19 December 2005

At the behest of Muslim bigots and multiculturalist fanatics the Bracks Government suspended free speech in Victoria by imposing a blasphemy law dressed up as an anti-vilification law. This has given Islamo-fascists a freehand to attack critics of Islam.

In a ruthless attempt to intimidate critics Muslim fanatics reported two pastors to Diane Sisely, the Equal Opportunity Commission boss, for criticising the Koran. This enemy of free speech and her fellow Stalinoids on the commission then launched proceedings against the pastors for exercising their fundamental and inalienable right to free speech. So far these pastors have had to pony up more than $100,000 to defend themselves against Bracks’ obscene blasphemy law and these lefty zealots.

However, circumstantial evidence suggests that members of the Equal Opportunity Commission entered into a conspiracy to prosecute these pastors in order to intimidate potential critics of Islam into remaining silent.

Diane Sisely hired May Helou, a Muslim bigot, to help her identify people criticising Islam. True to form, this Muslim Torquemada quickly swung into action. Helou incited several Muslim converts to attend a seminar on jihad that had been organised by a Melbourne Pentecostal church. As a result three Muslims attended. About 250 Christians were present.

Pastor Danny Nalliah and Pastor Daniel Scot addressed the crowd. Pastor Daniel Scot, who had been sentenced to death in Pakistan for his Christian beliefs, accurately cited passages from the Koran and the Hadith, pointing out that these had been used by fanatical clerics to justify jihad against the West, lying for Islam, murdering apostates, raping female prisoners, etc. (Tell me, little Miss Sisely, do these passages make the Koran hate speech?)

The Pastors’ response to this barbarism was that Christians should pray and that Muslims “should be loved”. (This just goes to show how viciously intolerant these Christians really are). Well, this was just too much for our freedom-loving Muslim converts. Seething with trumped-up indignation, these monuments to the unquestionable benefits of multiculturalism complained, surprise, surprise, to May Helou who immediately brought the EOC down on the heads of our oh so dangerous Pastors. As a member of the commission this Muslim bigot even got to sit in judgment on its religious victims. (Talk about acting as judge, jury and executioner).

There is no doubt in my mind that some members of the commission conspired with May Helou to engage in the religious persecution of these Christian critics of Islam.

Given the nature of the evidence there should be an immediate and independent investigation of Sisely and Helou. As the EOC has been compromised by religious bigotry and its obvious contempt for Australian values, it should be abolished.

Under Bracks’ blasphemy law these victims of Muslim intolerance were ordered by the Orwellian Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal to publicly apologise and humiliate themselves by spending $23,000 on ads. Furthermore, the Tribunal’s commissars ordered the pastors to submit to a form of re-education. They bravely refused to kowtow to these intellectual thugs.

The disgusting Stalinoid behaviour of Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal perfectly mirrors the behaviour of communist parties. Those who dissent from the party line are ordered to attend a meeting of party members where they are then humiliated and verbally abused. This continues until the victims submit*. Fortunately for Victorians, though they don’t know it yet, these pastors are determined to see that justice is done and the fundamental rights of Victorians are restored.

The riots in Sydney are revealing what happens when Australians get sick of a minority trying to impose, with the tacit agreement of cowardly politicians and half-witted multiculturalists, its reactionary Muslim beliefs on them

How does the slimy Mr Bracks view the riots that were incited by Lebanese Muslim thuggery? “Similar violence against ethnic minorities could occur [here]” (The Age, Attacks possible here, 12 December). Now you have it, Muslim thugs provoke riots and the lying Bracks smears the locals as racists.

Although it is something of mystery why Bracks is determined to impose a blasphemy law that favours Muslim bigots, what is not a mystery is the man’s contempt for the truth. Last September this mountebank met with several bishops. He looked them in straight in the eye and promised to make his blasphemy law less onerous. The lying creep then went about subverting our liberty by further strengthening this vicious law.

As a member of the Liberal Party I am outraged that Robert Doyle has supported Bracks’ anti-free speech laws. There are those of us in the Party who are sick of his moral cowardice and his lack of principles. We are also sick of Michael Kroger’s political string-pulling. Thanks to this power mad Brahmin the Party has been lumbered with the likes of Boyle, Sheezel and Helen Kroger.

Rumour has it that Kroger’s number is up. In the meantime the Party’s real liberals, liberal in the classical sense of the word, need to take a stand. Now Brookes has never bothered with religious matters, but when a bunch of theocrats, irrespective of their religion, succeed in limiting our freedoms then it is time to act.

It genuinely grieves me to have to do this because the Muslims I have known and worked with have always been decent to me and never raised the question of religious beliefs. But Bracks’ vile laws and the totalitarian behaviour of EOC and VCAT officials have left me with no alternative. So here goes:

The Koran is crap and Mohammed was a child-molestering, thieving, lying, murderous sadistic misogynist who couldn’t even spell his own name. How anyone with half a brain could be taken in by this loathsome thug beats me.

Now the law is the law, Bracks: So prosecute me. If you haven’t got the guts get the conspiring Diane Sisely and May Helou to send in their religious police. But if you think for one moment that a man like me would politely stand by and allow your two-faced commissars or some Vishinski-like judge to lecture me on tolerance and freedom, then you really are stupid.

While leftwing journalists and slimy politicians like Bracks and NSW Premier Morris Iemma smear Australians as racists, I should like to draw attention to what Professor von Mises had to say on the clash of values, which is what this is really all about:

In an Australia governed according to [classical] liberal principles, what difficulties could arise from the fact that in some parts of the continent Japanese and in other parts Englishmen were in the majority? (Liberalism: A Socio- Economic Exposition, Sheed-McMeel, 1978. Originally published as Liberalismus, Jena: G. Fischer, 1927).

But the treacherous likes of Sisely, Bracks and the bigoted Helou despise classical liberal values, preferring instead the heavy hand of the police state. These people and their admirers have clearly demonstrated their tyrannical inclinations, revealing once and for all that they are not to be trusted with any degree of political power.

*This is how the Hollywood branch of the Communist Party of the United States disciplined writers, producers and actors who challenged the party line. See Kenneth Lloyd Billingsley’s Hollywood Party, Prima Publishing, 1998. Also the God that Failed, Columbia

Press 2001, reveals just how vicious this mentality is. Mao’s Red Guards took this procedure of public confession, guilt and humiliation to its logical and gruesome conclusion. Mao: The Unknown Story, Jung Chang and John Halliday, Jonathan Cape London,

2005.

Gerard Jackson is Brookes’ economics editor