The Best Third World health care system in the First World, forty years of socialised medicine has given Australians this disgusting mess, they call “FREE Health Care” Look out America
A blog revealing the horrors of Islam,International Socialism,the misery these two evils are inflicting upon the free the world,and those it has already enslaved,along with various articles revealing the attacks from within upon the western Judeo Christian ethic by those we entrusted to preserve it. Videos and Pictures of many varied subjects from around the world, along with some jokes of mine and any funny ones you want to send me.
The Best Third World health care system in the First World, forty years of socialised medicine has given Australians this disgusting mess, they call “FREE Health Care” Look out America
Devils inside hidden Green agenda
By Andrew Bolt
The Daily Telegraph
July 21, 2010
ONE election result is already clear - and makes this debate about Tony Abbott's "secret" plans even more brainless.
Wake up, people. The Greens will have the balance of power in the Senate.
Labor sealed that deal when it agreed to swap preferences with a party which its wiser heads know would devastate the economy if it could.
That's politics, I guess.
Winning is all, and to hell with the national interest. But how grotesquely irresponsible?
Labor is helping into power a party which demands we scrap our power stations and close industries that earn us at least $60 billion a year.
Oh, and it wants us all to have more holidays, because hard work and making money really sucks.
Some 12 per cent of voters say this is just the party for them, and even Labor now says it's the best of the rest.
Yes, that really is how infantile our society, and our politics especially, has become.
But Labor, whose primary vote has been unusually low, says this only because it badly needs Greens preferences. In exchange, it's agreed to help the Greens save its own five Senate seats - and to probably win a couple more.
It was already inevitable Labor would win back some Senate seats from the Coalition.
But this deal also kisses goodbye to Family First Senator Steve Fielding, who lucked his seat in 2004 when Labor absentmindedly preferenced him but will lose it now Labor is steering votes to the Greens.
That will be all it takes. After this election, no government will be able to pass a law against the opposition's objection without the support of the Greens, and Greens alone.
Never has this party had such a great chance to inflict on us policies that many voters treat as position statements, rather than a deliberate manifesto for the deindustrialisation of our economy and the tribalising of our society.
This now is the real issue: How much of our future did Labor sell off just to get these Greens' preferences?
Never mind this week's scare campaign about what workplace laws Abbott might secretly plan. The hapless schmuck couldn't get them through a Greens-Labor Senate even if he wanted to.
No, what really needs debate is what the Greens might now demand from a Gillard Government in exchange for its vote. And that, in turn, needs journalists especially to take seriously this party's policies.
The Greens' manifesto is not written down for a joke. It is the serious work of ideological warriors hiding behind Bob Brown's amiable front.
Vote Greens in this election and you won't get cuddlier koalas, bigger hugs and cleaner rivers. In fact, you'll be voting to "transition from coal exports", which means ending a trade worth $55 billion a year .
You'll be voting to end "the mining and export of uranium", worth $900 billion a year. You'll be demanding farmers "remove as far as possible" all GM crops, which includes cotton worth about $1.3 billion a year.
You will be voting to close down many other industries, including export of woodchips from old-growth forests, certain kinds of fishing, oil and mineral exploration in wildernesses, and new coal mines.
You'll even be voting to close the Lucas Heights nuclear facility, even though it actually produces treatments for cancer.
In fact, you'll be voting for policies deliberately intended to make us poorer. Less industrialised. Or as the Greens' policy puts it, for a "reduction of Australia's use of natural resources to a level that is sustainable and socially just".
Maybe you think it won't matter if a few industries get shut. Maybe you really are that stupid. But you haven't heard the rest of the Greens' policies yet, have you?
You see, the Greens also plan to shut coal power stations that produce 80 per cent of our electricity. They not only "oppose the establishment of new coal-fired power stations" - claiming they make the planet dangerously hot - but intend to ban new coal supplies for those we already have. And they'll hit power stations with a new tax to make electricity too expensive for you.
Do you have any idea how many businesses would be driven broke by this Green frolic? How many hundreds of thousands of jobs would be lost?
If you think the Greens must have alternative power sources in mind, you're dreaming.
The Greens want to keep Labor's ban on nuclear power. They even want to scrap government-funded research into carbon capture.
So consider. If the Greens get their way we'll have huge industries banned, businesses driven broke and power prices driven through the roof, with not enough electricity for what industries will be left.
So, with our income slashed to ribbons, what do the Greens propose? Not deep cuts in every government program but a spending spree to make Kevin Rudd seem a miser.
It's free money for everyone. If you vote for the Greens, you're voting for an extra week of holidays for all, "mandated shorter standard working hours", more pay for women workers, higher pay for casuals and better weekly benefits to students and artists.
More pay for less work, at the mere stroke of a Green pen. Isn't that a darling way to reorganise the economy? What could possibly go wrong?
They promise to lift foreign aid to "a minimum of 0.7 per cent of GDP by 2010", which means an instant rise in handouts of $4 billion a year.
Another $2 billion a year will go to scrap tertiary fees and forgiving all HECs debts.
The Greens lazily assume that the bill will be covered by hiking corporate taxes, hitting the richer 5 per cent of Australians with wealth taxes, and slugging air travellers. Show us your costings, Bob.
I'd be amazed if after a year of two of this that anyone would want to come to a country which by then would be a smoking hole in the ground.
Yet the Greens plan to do their best to attract more people to their new nation of freeloaders. Any "asylum seeker" making it here by boat would be freed into the community within 14 days, security checks permitting, and rewarded with benefits, medical services and school for children. These goodies will be offered to "environmental refugees", too.
A new, militant industrial agenda is also buried in this New Age madness, signalling the arrival in Brown's party of "watermelon Greens" - green outside and red inside.
These, like NSW candidate Lee Rhiannon, seem Green more of convenience than faith, using this doctors' wives party to smuggle in the kind of hard-Left politics that would scare voters if they saw it coming under a hammer and sickle.
This is what a vote for the Greens really means. And it's this party of vandals, tribalists and closet totalitarians that shameless Labor now helps to such threatening influence.
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut down
Hey Hey crowd boos Tony Abbott
Tory Shepherd
The Daily Telegraph
July 21, 2010
TONY Abbott did not get the most friendly welcome on the set of Hey Hey It's Saturday tonight begging the question whether Prime Minister Julia Gillard made the right choice by declining to join him.
With a guitar riff and a cheesy intro by Daryl Somers, on walked ... Red Symons, to a chorus of boos, Kylie Minogue to a rousing welcome, Entourage's Rex Lee ... and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott.
Mr Somers said Prime Minister Julia Gillard had "gracefully declined" to join Mr Abbott on the set.
Mr Abbott was greeted with some applause but a majority of desultory jeers, and faced some random shouting from the audience during the show. He certainly did not look threatened by the homosexual Mr Lee sitting next to him.
Somers commended his campaigning stamina and asked whether he had further commitments. Mr Abbott said no, "no karaoke or anything like that".
The first act was some sort of awful inbred yokel performance, a woman who didn't last long before the gong was sounded.
"I quite like the Julia Gillard accent,” Mr Abbott said, giving her a score of 5.
Then there was a dear old guy doing stand-up who lasted a bit longer.
He asked Kylie to say hi to his grandkids and Kylie obliged.
“Well, he’s funnier than I am but I’m not sure he can keep up on the bike, but well done, it’s a great effort,” Mr Abbott said, and gave him a 6. Mr Lee gave him 7 for being “funnier than Tony Abbott”.
Act three was a man and a dog, or rather two – the dogs were cute, the man annoying. Kylie held her ears as the gong went.
“Look, I love animals,” said Mr Abbott, holding up a score of seven. Kylie was, again, more generous.
Next, and finally, some precocious youngsters rocked the house with Wild Thing and fine style and got the whole audience on board. Kylie laughed, Mr Abbot clapped.
Yokel Loretta something-or-other with the Gillard-esque voice won in the end.
Overall, Mr Abbott kept smiling with good cheer throughout, delivered some good one-liners, and at least he’s got the guts to do something a bit more … interesting.
It was hardly a spontaneous show of civil unrest or hatred against Tony Abbott by Hey Hey’s audience, in fact I thought it was representative of the type of results the Telegraph and the Australian, Channels 9 10 7 and Sky news are getting on their online and TV Polls minimum of 65 + % in FAVOUR of Abbott over Gillard in every poll since the Australian Council of Trade Unions appointed Gillard to the office of PM of Australia.
Worst. City. Ever.
ADAM GARTRELL SMH July 19, 2010
Dear Medan. I hate you.
I visited you recently and found you the most unpleasant, charmless and thoroughly depressing city I've ever encountered. And I've visited plenty of s---holes in my time.
Now, when it comes to big Indonesian cities I have pretty low expectations.
I live in Jakarta, the biggest of them all, so I know what I'm in for: traffic, pollution, heat, noise, chaos, the stench of human waste.
And you, Medan - Indonesia's third biggest city - you provided all those things. In great abundance.
In fact, even though your population, at three million, is a quarter that of Jakarta's, I reckon you're worse on just about every count.
Quite an achievement.
But Medan, you're awful not just because of your many failings but because you appear to have no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
You're slim pickin's for hotels, you don't seem to boast a single, decent restaurant and from what I've heard, you've got no real nightlife.
Your airport is a Boschian nightmare, your roads a mess, your buses an embarrassment and your taxis ... well, if I ever find one I'll let you know.
And ever heard of trees?
Okay, so you have a big mosque but it's also the closest thing you've got to a tourist attraction. And you have a few shopping malls but what city doesn't?
I understand now why you consistently feature on people's "Worst. City. Ever." lists.
You're at the very top of mine.
Okay, I admit, there's a personal element to this. See, I got robbed in one of your hotels.
It wasn't a very nice hotel. It promotes itself as a four star hotel when in actual fact it's closer to a two. But that's fine. I don't need luxury and it cost less than $100 a night.
Except, in the end, it actually cost a couple of grand. Because while I was out one night scouring the streets for a decent meal - in vain, of course - someone broke into my room and stole a giant wad of company cash from my suitcase.
Why did I have a giant wad of cash, you ask? Well, because Indonesia is a mostly cash economy, so I'm forced to travel with plenty of it. But why didn't I put it in the safe? Well, because the hotel didn't provide one.
And when I brought the robbery to the hotel's attention the staff were predictably - and perhaps deliberately - unhelpful.
Security staff at first said they could give me a keycard lock report, so I could see if anyone else entered my room. But then - for reasons not properly explained - they suddenly couldn't.
But that was okay, they said. They could show me the CCTV footage outside my room instead.
Oh no, wait, sorry! We don't actually know the password to review the CCTV!
Can you say "inside job"?
Needless to say I moved to a different hotel for my final night. I woke up the next morning in blood-stained sheets. Mozzies never take any interest in me but your Medan mozzies made quite a frenzied exception.
I didn't get malaria. But I did get spectacularly, violently sick about a week later from an intestinal parasite, which I'm certain I picked up from you, Medan. I just know it.
I've never been so happy to board a plane as I was the one that whisked me away from you, Medan. And I never want to see you again.
“Indonesian Muslims have been praying in the wrong direction for months, facing Somalia by mistake.”
Australia’s Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU) appointed Prime Minister, Madame / Comrade Gillard.
Comrade Julia Gillard explains her plan to use Labor as a Trojan horse for the far Left’s agenda:
For the Left to make any real advance all these perspectives on the relationship to Labor in government need to be rejected in favour of a concept of strategic support for Labor governments. We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under a long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognising the need to except (sic) often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance. The task of pushing back the current political constraints by changing public opinion would need to be tackled by the Left through government, social movements and trade unions.
That comes from a document Gillard wrote for the communist-formed Socialist Forum group which she helped to run, despite now claiming she was just a part-time “typist”. (See the document below.)
It’s clear from Gillard’s writings that she sees the Socialist Forum not as a mere “debating society” (another false claim), but as an activist group that would infiltrate Labor to push its own socialist agenda.
Well, her plan seems to be running to schedule so far. Of course, maybe she’s changed her mind about her far-Left agenda in the past few years, but I’d believe that more if she didn’t tell so many untruths about what she was up to.
As it is, I’m inclined to suspect Labor has a cuckoo in its nest. “
Rudd’s Australia: Internet censorship anti Rudd Labor Facebook site shut down
NATIONAL AFFAIRS: Julia Gillard's long-term agenda
by John Ballantyne
News Weekly,
10 July 2010
Don't say we haven't been warned.
Our new Prime Minister is not the mainstream, centrist leader that the media want us to think she is. Julia Gillard comes with a lot of ideological baggage from her radical-left past.
For several years she has played down her past political affiliations, attempted to mainstream herself and altogether presented an agreeable image to the public.
So appealing is she that she has won plaudits from across the political spectrum, even from conservatives such as Christopher Pearson and Janet Albrechtsen.
The left-dominated media, no doubt with an eye on the forthcoming federal election, have bent over backwards to depict Julia Gillard as, if anything, a conservative. They have reminded us that she was brought to power with the help of Labor's right-wing factions. Thus, so the story goes, she will be beholden to Labor's right and not stray far from moderate policies.
In the past week, Julia Gillard herself has tried to connect with conservative voters, even going so far as to hint that she would be prepared to take a harder line on asylum-seekers.
This is all for public consumption before the election. What she will be like after an election victory, when she has her own mandate to govern and is no longer so beholden to Labor power-brokers, is another question altogether.
Then we will see just how much of her radicalism she has shed and whether she really is the centrist Labor figure she would like us to think she is.
Ms Gillard has long been a prominent figure of Labor's powerful left-wing feminist caucus, Emily's List, which was founded by two former Labor premiers, Joan Kirner (Victoria) and Carmen Lawrence (Western Australia).
The stated aim of Emily's List is to raise money to help "progressive", i.e., pro-abortion, women get elected to parliament.
"Emily" stands for Early Money Is Like Yeast. (News Weekly, September 1, 2007).
Joan Kirner, whom Ms Gillard has described as a mentor and friend, was one of the driving forces behind the passage of Victoria's notorious 2008 abortion laws, which not only decriminalised abortion, but legalised late-term abortions right through nine months of pregnancy.
Ms Gillard has been unswervingly faithful to radical feminist orthodoxy. In 2000, as a member of a House of Representatives standing committee on education, she adopted a very hostile tone towards two members of the public who presented scientific data about the biological and psychological differences between the sexes and the specific educational needs of boys. (News Weekly, February 17, 2007).
Julia Gillard's first foray into politics was in the early 1980s, when, as a university law student, she became active in the now-defunct Australian Union of Students (AUS).
The AUS was then totally dominated by the extreme left. In 1983 — the year she was elected AUS president — an AUS annual council defeated heavily a call to oppose "all acts of terrorism and political violence"
(AUS Annual Council 1983: motion N28).
Furthermore, the AUS annual council declined to recognise the rights of religious clubs and societies at universities to "express their views on campus" or to have access to campus facilities (AUS Annual Council 1983: motion N34).
The AUS declared 1983 to be the International Year of the Lesbian.
It also adopted a policy on prostitution which said, in part: "Prostitution takes many forms and is not only the exchange of money for sex. … Prostitution in marriage is the transaction of sex in return for love, security and house-keeping." (Quoted by Helen Trinca, The Australian, April 6, 1984, p.7).
This bizarre statement made headlines across Australia. Anti-AUS student activists produced posters with the slogan: "AUS says your mother is a prostitute!"
By early 1984, not only Liberals, but moderate Labor and Jewish students, were campaigning vigorously to abolish the AUS. While Julia Gillard and her left-wing colleagues were defending the union, campus after campus was seceding from it, depriving it of funds and bringing about its rapid collapse.
From 1984 until 1993, Ms Gillard became a prominent figure in the militant left Socialist Forum, which had recently been formed by disaffected members of the Communist Party of Australia and Labor's left-wing.
It sought, among other things, to remove Australia from the ANZUS alliance and to twin Melbourne with Leningrad (re-named St Petersburg since the fall of communism).
Julia Gillard has made light of her youthful radicalism, and has been painstakingly careful to present herself as a moderate.
It is worth remembering, however, what she once wrote for the Socialist Forum on how the extreme Left could advance its agenda by giving "strategic support for Labor governments".
She said: "We need to recognise the only possibility for major social change is under a long period of Labor administration. Within that administration the Left needs to be willing to participate to shape political outcomes, recognising the need to except (sic) often unpalatable compromises in the short term to bolster the prospect of future advance." (Quoted by Andrew Bolt, "Gillard's plan for power", Herald Sun, October 29, 2007).
Don't say we haven't been warned.
OPINION: My unhappy memories of Julia
Babette Francis
Newsweekly
The election last year of Julia Gillard as deputy leader of the Labor Party brought back unhappy memories for Babette Francis.
I was giving evidence to a House of Representatives standing committee on employment, education and workplace relations, of which Julia Gillard was a member.
It was 2000. The committee was examining the educational disadvantage experienced by boys and seeking recommendations to ameliorate their plight.
Members of the public could make submissions. Alan Barron, from the Institute of Men's Studies, and I, among others, were invited to make a presentation.
As a member of the Victorian Committee on Equal Opportunity in Schools (1975-77), I had personally researched the problems experienced by boys.
In my presentation, I showed slides illustrating that males suffered disadvantage in all areas of life, with the exception of earnings.
Suicide
Male life expectancy was six years lower than that of females, and male infant mortality was higher. Males are far more likely than females to be in prison and to be victims of homicide, suicide, road accidents and drug or alcohol addiction.
Male success rates at Higher School Certificate exams are substantially lower than the female success rate, and boys outnumber girls four-to-one in requiring remedial or special education.
Alan Barron and I made some eminently reasonable recommendations, for instance, that educators should acknowledge the biological and psychological differences between the sexes and not uncritically adopt a feminist vision of an androgynous society.
Also that schools could consider offering single-sex classes, and that the recruitment of more male teachers should be encouraged.
To our astonishment, Julia Gillard adopted a hostile attitude to our evidence, almost as if we were the accused in the dock. I complained to committee chairman Dr Brendan Nelson, pointing out that members of the public giving information to a parliamentary inquiry, and receiving no remuneration for doing so, were doing the nation a service and deserved to be treated with courtesy.
Gillard turned the discussion into a totally different inquiry about why there weren't more women orthopaedic surgeons or members of parliament. This was no doubt one of her pet peeves.
I tried to explain that much of the discrepancy in male and female career outcomes and earnings were because of women's choices.
Also, women have babies and take time off from jobs to raise children. While numbers of males and females in medical courses were similar, after graduation, many women chose to work part-time. This may not be practical in orthopaedic surgery, which is a demanding specialty.
But Gillard would have none of this, nor my explanation that the differential in male and female incomes was not so significant when it was considered males shared their standard of living with their wives and partners and their children.
But the last straw was Gillard's facetious comment in the transcript of the proceedings. "Sorry about our banter. It started this morning when we had Babette Francis here and our behaviour has gone downhill ever since …"
Personally, as I wrote to Dr Nelson, I would not have thought it possible for Julia Gillard's behaviour to have gone further downhill — not in a public venue anyway — but I guess with a feminist it can be done.
The sad irony is that I highlighted the serious disadvantages of boys in education in my minority report as a member of the Victorian Committee on Equal Opportunity in Schools back in 1977.
It took the Federal Government 23 years to catch up with the seriousness of the problem.
Even now, any recommendations that might improve outcomes for boys will be lost in the stranglehold the feminist lobby has on state school systems — as typified by Julia Gillard.
— Babette Francis is national co-ordinator of Endeavour Forum Inc.
Babette Francis, "Emily's List — who and what are they?", News Weekly, September 1, 2007.
URL: www.newsweekly.com.au/articles/2007sep01_alp.html
When the founders of Obama Lies read Obama’s fictional autobiography, Audacity of Hope, it was immediately apparent that this book of Obama Lies is an attempt to define the man as a new messiah and to head off criticism of his obvious inadequacies. When the inaccuracies (read Obama Lies) in his background started to be uncovered and discussed, we went to the web to see if anyone had registered the domain name obamalies.com to use as a vehicle to expose Obama’s lies.
Thanks to Ruth for the above story.
US must drop cowboy logic over nuclear program, says Ahmadinejad
Daily Telegraph
19 7 2010
THE United States must drop its "cowboy" attitude if it wants to hold dialogue with Iran over its nuclear program, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said.
"We are for negotiations, but to do so you have to sit down like a good boy," Mr Ahmadinejad said, referring to the United States, in a speech broadcast live on state television.
"They adopt a resolution to force a dialogue, but this cowboy logic has no place in Iran."
World powers led by the US voted for new UN sanctions against Iran on June 9 in a bid to force it to stop its nuclear program which they suspect is aimed at making weapons. Iran denies its atomic drive has military aims.
Following up on the UN sanctions, US President Barack Obama on July 1 imposed Washington's toughest-ever unilateral punitive measures against Iran.
Mr Ahmadinejad said Washington's real concern was not that Iran may make an atom bomb but that Tehran is fast rising as a regional power.
"They say we have intelligence that Iranians will most likely build one atomic bomb. Well, this is a lie, but let's say it is true. How many atomic bombs do you have?" he said.
"The Americans themselves say 5000 plus... Is someone who has 5000 fourth and fifth generation atomic bombs, with very advanced launchers, afraid of one bomb? They are not afraid of one, not of a hundred, not of a thousand (bombs). They are afraid of the collective awakening of the Iranian soul."
Displaying his trademark defiance, Mr Ahmadinejad vowed that Iran would not back away from its uranium enrichment program. Washington, he charged, knew full well that Iran is "not after an atomic bomb", despite its claims to the contrary.
"You sanction our banks and some products and think that we will back down and hand over the key to the Iranian nation," he said.
"They should know that they will take their dream of forcing down the Iranian nation to their graves. Our nation is one family... we may have different views, but we are one body against you."
World powers, immediately after the UN sanctions measure was passed, called for dialogue with Iran as part of its dual track strategy of imposing punitive measures and at the same time offering to hold talks. But Mr Ahmadinejad has ordered a freeze in talks at least until end of August as a "penalty" against world powers for imposing sanctions on Tehran.
Madame Gillard arrived at the Governor Generals residence Saturday (July 17) morning to visit her Union backers Mother in Law, Governor General, Quentin Bryce that she was ready to face the electorate.
I was surprised when one radio commentator described her clothing and went on to say that she was wearing a “Pearl Necklace”.
PA child: Fatah Conference taught me to be a combatant and fight Israel
Ahmad Abd Al-Wahab:
"I came here following the conference elections. I hope that there will be more conferences like the 6th Fatah Conference (August 2009). These conferences are important for us because it makes us aware of leadership and that we will be combatants and wage resistance (violence) against the Israelis." PMW
Brothers charged with 20 child sex offences
SMH
ALICIA WOOD
July 11, 2010
TWO brothers sexually assaulted teenage girls for years and one of them gave his victims drugs in return for sexual favours, police alleged at Parramatta Bail Court yesterday.
The men were each charged with 10 child sex offences. One was remanded in custody but the other was granted bail and allowed to return home.
Michael El Ali, 44, and Houssam Khaled El Ali, 37, both of Katoomba, represented themselves before Magistrate Andrew George.
In evidence tendered to the court, police alleged that Houssam Khaled El Ali had molested four girls aged 12 to 14 between 2000 and 2006 and that Michael El Ali had sexually abused a girl between 2006 and January this year. The girl was aged 13 when the alleged assaults began.
Michael El Ali denied the allegations. ''Whatever they are saying is not true. I didn't do anything,'' he said.
Police alleged that when the girl was 13, Michael El Ali began asking her to take her clothes off in front of him, forced her to perform oral sex on him and raped her.
The girl's mother told police she saw the pair naked together. Police told the court they had found a photo of the girl naked from the waist up on Michael El Ali's mobile phone.
They said Houssam Khaled El Ali had met one of his alleged victims at the girl's birthday party.
According to police evidence, Houssam Khaled El Ali ran a tobacconist at the time the offences took place and allegedly gave young girls cigarettes, drugs and cash for sexual favours. Police alleged that on more than one occasion, he had taken a group of girls to a motel where he had sexually assaulted them and given them cigarettes and alcohol.
One of his alleged victims had entered drug rehabilitation when she was aged 14.
In granting bail to Houssam Khaled El Ali, Magistrate Andrew George said: ''Given the age of the offences, I am not confident the case [against Houssam Khaled El Ali] is that strong. The last offence was around 2006 and it has taken four years before the matter has come to light.''
Michael El Ali will face Penrith Local Court tomorrow. Houssam Khaled El Ali will appear at Penrith Local Court on Friday.
Muslims furious with media portrayal as terrorists and criminals
SMH
ADELE HORIN
July 12, 2010
AUSTRALIAN-MUSLIM families have good relations with other Australians, and feel safe and happy here. But they are furious with the media for depicting Muslims as terrorists and criminals, a report for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship reveals.
Hey those Crazy, Whacky, Zany,Muslims are at it again, seen here pissing themselves laughing at the Sydney Morning Herald’s latest example of appeasement to their Multicultural Masters, portraying the Labor Party and the left’s’ preferred Australian’s, yet again as the “real victims” in their world wide war against civilization aka. the Infidels.
''The families felt strongly the media was gunning for Muslims; it was a huge concern for them,'' said Ilan Katz, the director of the Social Policy Research Centre at UNSW, and a co-author of the study. The research is part of a wider project commissioned by the department to understand the concerns and needs of Muslim Australians.
Based on in-depth interviews with 72 family members, it found people traced a change in the media's depiction of Muslims from the September 11 attacks in New York and Washington.
''They felt community attitudes had hardened towards them since then because of the media,'' said Dr Katz.
An Iraqi father said: ''The media portrays us as terrorists; the media is against us.'' A man from Sudan said, ''Australians listen to the media, that is what they believe.''
Yet the Australian-Muslims were mainly positive about their daily interactions with ordinary Australians, friends, workmates, and passers-by. On the whole they felt accepted and appreciated what Australia could offer. Another father said: ''Australian government high schools even have a mosque [prayer room] … and the students perform midday and Friday prayers there.''
However, a major concern was low income, with some blaming workplace discrimination. Some parents were troubled their children had become more religious than they were. ''The daughters were wearing the hijab but the mothers weren't,'' Dr Katz said. Others were anxious about their children's involvement with drugs, sex or alcohol.
Nadia Saleh, 42, of Punchbowl, calls Australia ''this remarkable country'' that she came to from Lebanon 21 years ago. With her husband Karl, 52, she has raised four children.
''We have got some people who do the wrong thing but it is unfair to criticise the entire Islamic community,'' said Mrs Saleh, a manager at the Riverwood Community Centre.
The study highlights the diversity of Australian-Muslims, who come from countries as disparate as Albania and Nigeria.
Dr Katz found Imams were a main source of guidance for parents with family problems and needed more help and resources from government and non-government agencies to do a better job of pastoral care.
There are thousands of hours of film of Hitler and his fellow Nazi’s laughing and joking in the same sort of propaganda pap pieces to show the world what a great bunch of happy go lucky mass murderers they were also, they still believed in the total elimination of those who did not share their view of world domination, the difference between Nazi’s and Muslims is that the Nazi ally’s, the Muslims, are still a functioning today and have succeeded in almost every objective they swore to achieve back in WW2, Islamism , Nazism what’s the difference ? Islam is Terrorist Organization in almost every Nation on earth,a “Religion” yeah right, and I’m from the Government and I’m here to help.
Ok so how about we see what was reported in the months of June and July 2010 after reading these reports it’s no wonder Muslims are demanding our Media not be allowed to report their activities in Sydney and Australia generally, I simply don’t have time or room to report what happens in Melbourne with the African Muslims why they are even more happy go lucky and carefree than the Sydney Muslims.
European culture and national sovereignty replaced with a new identity. Not European, not post-National, but Islamic
Europe in Twilight
By Daniel Greenfield Sunday, July 4, 2010
Sultan Knish
It is not too incredible to imagine that within a century, German, the language of Goethe, Schiller and Mann, may become a dead language. That is already the almost certain fate of the Swedish and Norwegian languages. French, Spanish and English will survive as the pidgin languages of distant colonies, but in their own capital cities, these languages are swiftly becoming transformed into dialects, crossbred with Middle Eastern and African intonations and jargon to become increasingly alien to their own origins.
In hardly two generations we have moved from a world dominated by Europe, to one in which the peoples that not too long ago formed its ruling civilization may become extinct. The nations of Europe are caught between the economic unsustainability of socialism and the political fortunes of its overlords, who have built entire economic castles of cards on government entitlements and guest workers. The European Union has been proven to be unworkable, even as an authoritarian organization. It may survive, but like all overly enthusiastic parasites, its survival would only serve to quicken its host’s doom.
The One-Worldism that once so animated European socialists is conceptually dead. The European Union is its last gasp, and the international organizations erected in desperate fits of optimism from the UN on down, have become a sham of a farce, unfit to do anything but promote the agendas of the most brutal and power hungry regimes. It was inevitable that European intellectuals, living in a cluster of nations with a long history of internal warfare, would try to embrace post-nationalism as the solution. But the hole in their One Worldism was the assumption that the rest of the world would be happy to follow suit, tossing national identities, religious ideals and all the usual dreams that come with them overboard, in order to be part of one big happy globe. That of course was not the case.
Nationalism did not doom Europe, post-nationalism did. WW2 would not have been the continent killer that it became, had Hitler and Mussolini not confronted an England and France who were no longer too sure about this fighting thing. It was not an excess of German nationalism that was the problem, but an excess of English pacifism, the cynical post-war poses which insisted that nothing was worth fighting for, and politicians who mirrored that horror of war by allowing Nazism and Communism to get away with murder, over and over again. Yet after WW2, the very same “thinkers” who had agitated against doing anything about Hitler, distributed the blame for the war equally to both sides, as if the SS and the SAS were moral equals.
If post-WW1 rejected of nationalism and embrace of anti-war cliches helped Hitler on his course, in the post-WW2 period they helped the USSR, and in the post-Cold War period, Islam. In each case, the aggressors who had not left behind an identity based will to power were rewarded with a compliant Europe. Twice the US bailed out Europe, but after the Cold War, America is suffering from the same disease. And so the US Army which shielded Eton graduates who rejected war on moral grounds from the consequences of their appeasement of Nazism, and the US Air Force which protected a Western Europe that decided war was barbaric from the threat of the Communist barbarians of the East, can no longer do anything to help stop the Islamization of Europe.
Europe’s leaders surrendered their national identities and cultures bit by bit
Europe’s leaders surrendered their national identities and cultures bit by bit, expecting to find some new Utopian society on the other end. Instead all they found was debt and savagery. Socialism slashed the birth rate and hiked the budget. The immigrants and guest workers who were brought in to compensate for both, only inflated the budget further and fixed the birth rate in their own direction. England and France left behind their colonies, only to have those colonies follow them home, like ownerless dogs turned feral. And Europe’s governments pretended that this was the best of all worlds. After all European culture and national sovereignty were being stamped out, but it was being replaced with a new identity. Not European, not post-National, but Islamic.
The victors of WW1 had been so certain that the losers were as willing as they were to move on. They were proven tragically wrong. The losers of the Clash of Civilizations are most certainly not ready to move on. What they want is a rematch, and they’re getting one, even as Europe closes its eyes and pretends nothing is wrong. The creed that has not forgotten the loss of Spain was willing to wait, just long enough to begin winning an old war in a new way. Or a new war in an old way, depending on your perception of historical memory.
By abandoning its identities, Europe abandoned any form of meaningful self-definition, all that remained to define national identity were documents and television advertisements. (In this way Europe is at least one step ahead of us. All we have are the advertisements.) When you spend enough time asking, “Who am I?”, you realize that there is no answer, and therefore devalue the question. The post-modern nations no longer have real identities, but strings of neatly woven together platitudes having something to do with the human spirit. They pride themselves on mocking their own old identities and on celebrating the other, even when the other is trying to kill them.
To fight for a nation, its citizens must see it as a meaningful part of their identity. Without that, it is easy enough to reduce all wars to greed and a refusal of the concerned parties to sit down at a table and work everything out like civilized people. But Europe’s post-national project insisted on abandoning that Europe, and replacing it with a New Europe. And that New Europe was little more than documents and television advertisements, an entity in search of an identity. It prided itself on being cool, rather than meaningful, God Save the Queen played on an electric guitar, Prime Ministers being serenaded by rap stars and the flash and thunder of fireworks to drown out any difficult questions.
The New Europe was tolerant, just not of its own citizens. It did not particularly stand for or against anything, except the environment and human rights. It still saw itself as the leader, when in reality it had become the Third World’s camp follower. It was an endless party that wasn’t terribly lively and had in any case run out of money some years back. Its mores had gotten rowdier, its bureaucracy had become more byzantine, and its leaders more spineless. It was marking time, watching the hands of the clock sweep around the blue dial and its golden starred numbers. Pretending that it still had time left.
A new golden age of Islam, built on the looted technology and wealth of Europe
And so today Europe is in twilight, its sun has set and the shadows have grown. Huddled shapes are massing, gathering their forces and preparing for Europe’s long night. A night it may never wake from. Burning cars and burqas, mosques and medieval mores being enforced again in Republics that had prided themselves on their showy modernism, The vandals of London and Paris, Brussels and Rome, know exactly what they’re fighting for. A new golden age of Islam, built on the looted technology and wealth of Europe. Just as the old one had been built on stolen Roman and Greek texts that had somehow escaped burning by the Islamic hordes. But the reality may be more complex.
Europe had hoped to leave nationalism behind, but instead it replaced its own native nationalisms, with those of the Middle East, Africa and Islamic Asia. And much as some European countries still fancifully imagine that they can tie it all together with a revamped French or English identity, the way their American counterparts pledge allegiance to multiculturalism, it can’t work. A leaning tree will not be tied in place with a paper rope. The strength of an identity is its fundamental security. And the strength of an identity derives from a meaningful identification. Take away that identification, and you have a weak construct that cannot stand on its own.
Culture abhors a vacuum, and the human mind will fill in identities where they are lacking. And while Islam could not contend with the complexity of European culture, its identity is far more uncomplicated and secure. The Muslims protesting against returning English soldiers understand their identity and role in a way that the bobbies directed to keep them apart, do not. And this problem extends all the way up the trunk of government, and down again by way of the poisoned sap of appeasement. For European Muslims, there is only the decision between Jihad Now or Jihad Later When We Are In the Majority. Europeans have to debate whether a Muslim cleric who calls for the implementation of Islamic law is compatible with their national values, but the followers of the cleric suffer from no such confusion. Their identity is strong because it is simple and brutal, and because while the oil rich tyrannies of the East have poured enormous sums into building up those identities, the native governments have squandered fortunes to reprogram the identities of their own people into a configuration more suitable for a world in which buses are bombed and every new week turns over a new terror cell.
To disarm a man’s identity is to take away his soul. It can be reversed, but is no easy task
While the Islamists continue programming identity into regional Muslims, Europe’s governments instead focus on deprogramming their own citizens. While Turkey embraces both Islam and aggressive nationalism and yet demands EU membership, existing EU members are working to strip away the remains of their national identities. The outcome is clear. To disarm a man’s identity is to take away his soul. It can be reversed, but is no easy task. And Europe’s post-nationalism has produced a generation that despises war even more fervently than their grandparents did, despises the United States for its purported warmongering even while living on a diet of American culture, and prides itself on tolerance for immigrants and refugees. Even self-interest can only move them so far, considering that they have been taught that self-interest is a dirty word. (Along with unilateralism and colonialism, but not Communism.) But renewal can only come from identity, for people to wake up and fight for their rights, they must first know who they are, so that they will believe that their rights are worth fighting for.