The Australian Protectionist Pathetics Election Results:

For those interested how the loony leprechaun party went, they achieved 840 primary senate votes, and were ‘gifted’ preferences which allowed them to claim a 1200 vote total (1198 to be exact).

What this means is, their entire facebook membership quota (833), and 7 other individuals (most likely family members who don’t… have facebook accounts) voted for them.

What this means, is that they had nil electorate support outside of their own internal workings. Somehow Hodges sees this as some kind of good result. True, it is a good result if you feel happy that it appears your groups membership had all voted for you.

Oddly enough, this figure (inclusive of the surprise preferences) brings their vote total to dead on what we expected their maximum capacity would be.

But why did the electorate ignore this pair of trendsetters? Let’s take a look at his preference justification:

On the other hand, The Communist Alliance thumped them with 5236 votes, While Australia first are probably laughing down their noses at the LWC’s result with their 7316. All post preferences.

Both of which were convincingly thrashed by the ‘Socialist Alliance Party’ at 24,261.

To give you an idea of how remotely insignificant their ‘good result considering’ was, the ‘Family First Party’ gained 207,445 after preferences and didn’t gain a seat, rather actually lost one.

The fact that the APP candidates gained nil acceptance in the electorate outside of their ‘club’ is an indication of how little impact they have on the current political sphere.

A good point raised by Chris. And despite their denial of being complete no-hopers, and their deafening silence over at their ‘Fuck Off We’re Full’ group, theantibogan authors managed to stumble across the remnants of their election party, where they couldn’t even attract more than 2 guests.

It’s hard to understand why these racist bogans still hold onto the idea that they’re representing the feelings of the majority of Australians. And with disrespectful campaign flyers like the one below, it’s easy for the rest of us to realise why they’re such epic failures.

* Post election results/comments provided by Scott Kernaghan

48 thoughts on “The Australian Protectionist Pathetics Election Results:

  1. Just exactly what I expected. What I thought was hilarious was that they didnt even specify their party on the ballot paper. Clearly they were worried they would get even LESS votes! LOL. What a pack of tools. Only 8 of them turned up at their OWN rally in Melbourne. Now that’s just SAD. ROTFL

    • They didn’t specify the party because they’re not registered with the AEC yet.
      Also the same… HAhahahaahaha, what a pack of chumps. Hopefully they’ll split conservative votes a little bit.

  2. Pingback: World Wide News Flash

  3. It’s not difficult to obtain Federal political party registration. Even joke parties have managed to do that over the years.

    But somehow or other the nAPPys could not find 500 electors who were willing to be publicly identified with such a pair of losers.

    Now to the numbers. There are 4.6 million registered voters in NSW. Of those 4.6 million, only 1200 saw fit to vote for the nAPPys. Obviously they may have slightly benefited from someone doing a donkey vote either above or below the line, since they were group D (for Donkey?)

    Dazza tried real hard and managed to get 20 votes in his own area in the electorate of Hughes. One of those would have been him, so that’s 19. Nicky actually managed 24 in his seat of Sydney (make that 23). A stunning result all around.

    I am sure that Daz and Nicky as the great patriots they are were eager to see if they had reached the magic 4% of the vote to qualify for electoral funding under the Act. We regret to inform them that this did not happen.

  4. What is evident now is the lethargy of so many Australians. That so many Australians have been told often enough to fear being called a “racist”, “bigot”, or “xenophobe”…that they won’t make a peep or take any action…even as they lose their country around them!
    That so many Australians have been told that they don’t even have a country or a culture, they they cannot even speak of their own country…lest that even be called “racist”…to the point at which it overrides their own better judgement so severly!
    That so many Australians have been tricked and duped, that so amny Australians have been lured into thinking this is all meant to happen…and that they are “not allowed” to either have a say in THEIR OWN COUNTRY, or to oppose and defend against it’s inundation and destruction!

    Australia HAD a Protectionist Party over a century ago! Our first two great prime-ministers were of the Protectionist Party!
    Most of us though we were still safe here! That things were right and we could move safelt into the future.
    It’s shocking the point we’ve been brought to.

    Clearly…Australia needs, and Australian’s need, a Protectionist Party AGAIN!

  5. Scott, you live in such a fantasy world.

    Clearly Australians want a socialist government before the want to dig up a dead and outdated idea.

    Protectionism = massive community fail.

  6. How is protecting a community a massive community fail?
    How does a community striving to protect itself classify as a massive community failure?
    How, in any way, shape, or form, does a community striving to protect itself…as is it and their right…translate in your mind as a “massive community fail”???

    Where do I start with how wrong that notion is?
    Most migrant or refugee groups coming here are departing failed countries or cultures…but they intend to protect their own community here…is that also further massive failure of their community?
    Do you consider the Tibetan’s struggle to protect their people and country a massive community failure?
    Japan pursues a completely protectionist national and social philosophy and policy…is the Japanese desire to protect themselves and their country’s integrity a massive community failure?
    The ONLY reason there are still different communities around the world…to whatever level they are at…is because they strove to PROTECT themselves!
    Do you call the Aboriginal wish to protect their culture a massive community failure?
    Do you label any other (non-White/non-Western) people’s, nation’s, or community’s efforts to protect themselves as a massive community failure on their behalf?

    Don’t you wish to “protect” all these communities that you recklessly invite in here?
    THAT is the massive community failure…for OUR community!
    As the influx of massive numbers of foreigners into a another community is always a disaster for the host community!

    Australia had a protectionist policy for the better part of a century, and for all that time was FLYING, was on top, was safe, secure, and confident.
    That carried over for some time as well…but that is FAST withering away as hordes flood in here, as big business sells out, and as liberals plunge the knife in the back!

    Australia’s protectionism is part and parcel of what MADE Australia great!

    Australia HAD a perfect, and truly socialist, system for so long!
    That has been SOLD OUT though…privitisation, globalisation, materialism, and multi-culturalism is DESTROYING this country and community!

    The fantasy…is of people such as yourself…that Australians will take the loss of their country lying down, and that the wildly divergent communities coming here will all just “get along”, like smiles and sunshine!

    Australians do NOT want a Socialist/Communist goverment such as you posit!

    Australians want to PROTECT themselves, their society, their community, and their children and children’s children’s future!
    That is our birthright!

    Australia MUST protect itself again!

    • Scott you spinless selfish twat, what you just woffled about is called change its also called globalisation, westernisation, new world order, free trade etc. If you dont like it go back to where you came from im sure the Aboriginals couldnt care less of your kind. This is the sad truth which you my bogan prejudist anti muslim friend should understand.

      change is inevitable

    • Good morning Scott.

      “Australia had a protectionist policy for the better part of a century, and for all that time was FLYING, was on top, was safe, secure, and confident.”

      Yes if you conveniently forget 1941 onward.

      “Australia HAD a perfect, and truly socialist, system for so long!”

      Had we got a truly socialist system back then, there wouldn’t be poor people back then. But unfortunately for your arguments, there were intense class divisions.

      I’ll admit i’m not a big fan of materialism, but as Ayn Rand would say:

      “America’s abundance was created not by public sacrifices to the common good, but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America’s industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages, and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way.” Ayn Rand, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.

      And on the topic of Ayn Rand, who is Russian-American by the way, some quotes for you.

      “Let no man posture as an advocate of peace if he proposes or supports any social system that initiates the use of force against individual men, in any form. ”

      “The moral precept to adopt…is: Judge, and be prepared to be judged.”

      “There is a level of cowardice lower than that of the conformist: the fashionable non-conformist.”

      “The men who attempt to survive, not by means of reason, but by means of force, are attempting to survive by the method of animals.

      Ciao,

      Rudolf Belka,

      Second Lieutenant of the White Tower of Gondor,

      Gold Squadron, pilot 5, veteran of the Battle of Yavin.

  7. Sorry guys, I’m with Scott here.

    In the Europe of 500 years ago, he’d be branded a ‘witch’ or a ‘heretic’ for speaking against the prevailing delusions. His friends would disown him, his possessions would be confiscated, and he’d be burned at the stake.

    These days you get branded a ‘racist’ and rational discourse ends right there.

    Self-styled ‘socialists’ who campaign against ‘anti-Muslim racism’ (though Islam is a religion, not a race) should ask themselves how sympathetic Muslims are to their hallowed notions of female equality, same sex marriage, abortion and the seperation of church and state.

    Expecting immigrants to embrace the ideals that make Australia preferable to their countries of origin is not racist.

    In my experience, the strongest advocates of multiculturalism come from affluent white suburbs. If they had to live in areas where white-skinned English speakers were a minority (as I did for seven years) they wouldn’t necessarily become ‘racists,’ but I’d expect their outlook to become a lot less idealistic.

    Three of my former girlfriends and my best friend are all first-generation immigrants from non-English speaking backgrounds, and all of them support tighter immigration laws.

    Don’t go branding me a racist for daring to talk common sense!

    • Hey James, guess what, the Holocaust kind of made your claim to a right to “debate” whether racism is acceptable or not somewhat irrelevant,wouldn’t you say?

      My grandfather was in Military Intelligence with the British Army. He saw the camps and spoke to the survivors.

      That’s what anyone who gives support to any form of racism and bigotry in this country of immigrants ultimately wants.

      Scott is deluded, but then again so were the Nazis.They were also masters of making up a supposedly logical argument based on fantasy facts to back up their arguments. Rather like your arguments James.

      Is Judaism a “race”or a religion James? The Nazis didn’t seem to worry about distinctions did they?

      Oh and I live in Western Sydney by choice. I have no problem with my multi-ethnic neighbourhood and the advantages it has. So why do you?

  8. Scott.

    Australia is protecting itself.

    Do you really think a couple of dickheads from the backwaters of Sydney are going to protect Australia?

    You’re a little bit stupid, aren’t you. You’ve just typed several hundred words to justify something that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand.

    Feel free to start your own protectionist party. Probably couldn’t hurt to have two Keystone political parties on hand to give us all a laugh. But don’t try and pretend you’re protecting anything, because you just don’t have the knowledge, skills or ability to do so.

  9. And sorry to tell you this, simply making a statement a writing ‘!!!’ next to it doesn’t make it factual.

    The reality is, that the Socialists outpolled the Protectionists by a substantially larger amount. This is a fact, and you’re just going to have to live with the fact that they were far preferred over the Protectionist party clowns.

  10. APP hahha where do i start with these clowns, to call them bogans id be offending the bogans, to call them white supremacist’s id be offending white supremacists to call them bigoted uneducated un Australians would be about right. this clan has to realise that its not the 1960’s anymore and that we share this great indeginous land with other multicultural and multi religion people.

    Darrin & Nick are dead set scum bags that dont deserve to breathe this precious air. GO AWAY & DIE

  11. Guys – leave poor little Scotty alone!

    He’s trying to PROTECT us from the multi-dimensional slug monsters! PROTECT us from killer Martian piranhas! And most importantly PROTECT us from boring WRITING that doesn’t contain at least ONE word out of every ten THAT is in CAPITAL LETTERS!

    Hey little Scott – I like our fantasy games that WE are playing on this website – It’s so fun being CREATIVE with our imagination ISN’T it?

    And I agree with James.

    Some of my best friends are called James and they agree that the name “James” is actually based on the derivative of an ancient Aramaic word used generally to decribe a person who flagrantly makes up people or deliberately misconstrues existing people to support a political stance that so far off tangent that it makes absurd seem normal. Since they’re called James too they must be right.

    I’m mean I’m not anti-James-ist – as I said some of my best friends are called James – I just think they’re all bloody idiots most of the time.

    400 years ago people called James in places that had witch-hunts (non-civilized places like England?) were grouped in with other sane people like Scientologists and David Koresh supporters and burnt as witches for daring to speak the truth.

    This is why we must BAN THE TARDIS so that all this time-travel stuff stops happening! I’d much rather live in a world where we have to create random and absurdist hypotheses about what would have happened if something that could never happen did happen, to support wildly silly comments we make…

  12. Terror Australis – you’re obviously gifted with a wild imagination. I daresay it’s a little too wild, as I haven’t made anyone up.

    Nor did I claim at any stage that the likes of Scott were “burnt at the stake.” I suggest you read my last post again but do so more carefully this time.

    Just for the record, I didn’t vote for the APP and don’t have much time for one-policy parties in general. I don’t know what my name, my supposed support of extreme political stances, David Koresh or the TARDIS have to do with the issues I raised.

    Your tone turns what should be meaningful discussion into childish name-calling, but you’re in good company. Once again, I didn’t vote for the APP, but I strongly object to its detractors labelling anyone who did a bogan or racist or saying they don’t deserve to breathe.

    Whatever your agenda, you’ll advance it more through civil discussion. At least you’ve proved my last post right – rational discourse seems beyond you.

    Which one of my “hypotheses” did you find “random” and “absurd?” Was that comment even directed at me? If anyone’s made “wildly silly” comments it’s you. I’m sorry to point out the obvious, but you seem to have trouble with these things. You’ve proved me right on one count, though – there’s no rational discourse in your reply.

  13. Thanks James!

    You are right – my imagination has gone wild – perhaps over-stimulated by all these fantasy role-playing games that I indulge in with Little Scotty. Sorry to involve you in that.

    I can see clearly now the logic, rationale and progression of your thesis and how it all makes sense when you read it carefully. For example:

    You wrote:

    “Nor did I claim at any stage that the likes of Scott were “burnt at the stake.” I suggest you read my last post again but do so more carefully this time.”

    And in your previous post you wrote:

    “In the Europe of 500 years ago, he’d be branded a ‘witch’ or a ‘heretic’ for speaking against the prevailing delusions. His friends would disown him, his possessions would be confiscated, and he’d be burned at the stake.”

    In reading you “last post… more carefully” I see you logic clearly James as “burnt” and “burned” are two completely different words. I apologise sincerely for getting the past and past participle of the word “burn” mixed up and will endeavour never to do so again in future.

    You also wrote:

    “Just for the record, I didn’t vote for the APP and don’t have much time for one-policy parties in general. I don’t know what my name, my supposed support of extreme political stances, David Koresh or the TARDIS have to do with the issues I raised.”

    I’m sorry James – using the names of other contemporary fruitbats (as per our Little Scotty) and a time-machine from the BBC television series “Dr Who” was merely a terribly complicated way of suggesting that your thesis that nay-sayers would be “burned” (did I get it right this time) at the stake is: a) true and correct because time-machines exist that allow us to test your theory; and b) recognising speakers of the TRUTH such as David Koresh have through time immemorial been subjected to terrible public ridicule – poor Little Scotty falls right in this category.

    You then wrote:

    “Your tone turns what should be meaningful discussion into childish name-calling, but you’re in good company. Once again, I didn’t vote for the APP, but I strongly object to its detractors labelling anyone who did a bogan or racist or saying they don’t deserve to breathe”

    You are right! I did turn a MEANINGFUL discussion in to childish name-calling; unlike our dear play-mate Little Scotty who has always propounded such sensible and rational arguments WITHOUT the GRATUITOUS use of CAPITAL letters THROUGHOUT his writings. You should read his other posts to see how SENSIBLE and PROFOUND he really is.

    If it’s any consilation I truly believe you deserve to breath – I’m also quite a big fan of ensuring you have fresh drinking water, enough food and shelter not name but a few of your rights – but I’m keeping hush-hush about it because it may make you believe I ascribe to the fundamental tenets of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and that, as Little Scotty will probably point out to you, is a multiCULTist-LESBIAN-ISLAMIC-ZIONIST piece of propoganda.

    You then wrote:

    “Whatever your agenda, you’ll advance it more through civil discussion. At least you’ve proved my last post right – rational discourse seems beyond you.”

    Again you are right and I apologise. Civil discussion is the ONLY way to do things. I actually thought I was doing exactly that as I was following Little Scotty’s lead from other posts. I thought civil discussion meant coming up with wild and idiotic ideas and then wrapping them neatly in BIG words and of course as previously mentioned, using a LOT of capital letters. Then gratuitously (was that word BIG enough?) ignoring everything else anyone said because it didn’t fit into my paradigm of how the world works – is this not civil discussion?

    You wrote:

    “Which one of my “hypotheses” did you find “random” and “absurd?” Was that comment even directed at me? If anyone’s made “wildly silly” comments it’s you. I’m sorry to point out the obvious, but you seem to have trouble with these things. You’ve proved me right on one count, though – there’s no rational discourse in your reply.”

    To which of course I must reply: “Pink teletubbies wax Corvettes with squid during the monsoon.”

    Scott wrote:

    “Thanks James, and good on you!”

    To which I must reply: “No more games of logic my dear sir? I am greatly saddened…”

  14. The game can go on as long as you want. Sorry my form hasn’t been the best, but no-one’s is at 3am after a night on the town.

    It’s all been good fun anyway!

  15. ‘Terror Australis’, why can’t you actually speak about the actual issue?
    Australians have NEVER been asked if they want any migrants or refugees coming here, it has NEVER been put to Australians if they wish to have their country reduced to a divided, violent, dirty, crowded, multi-racial mess, it has NEVER been openly put to Australians if they are happy to be made a minority in their own society, Australians have NEVER been asked if they wish to lose their country!
    For those engineering all this KNOW that it severely contradicts the welfare, well being, and wishes of Australians!
    They KNOW that in an open discourse Australians would stridently oppose what it being done to them and their country!

    Australia is currently being rudely flooded with hundreds of thousands of foreigners, this is already disastrous. The plan is to continue to flood Australia. The plan IS to make a Australians a disposessed minority within their own society…as is happening with other Western countries.

    And people like yourself frig around, beat around the bush, lie, and engage in all kinds of bizarre mental arithmetic and contradictory verbal gymnastics, liberally laced with insults…so as to evade and avoid the issue, to postpone any criticial discussion of this vile agenda until it’s too late, if ever.

    People like you shall NEVER openly take into account what is being done to Australia.
    You shall witlessly indulge in smug, mocking banter…erroneously posing Australians that speak up for Australia as somehow being the ones in the wrong!

    Constantly avoiding the real questions, the real issue.

    Well we Australians have EVERY right to discuss, question, and oppose all this…it is our BIRTHRIGHT to defend ourselves and to protect our society and future generations!

    • “Australia is currently being rudely flooded with hundreds of thousands of foreigners, this is already disastrous. The plan is to continue to flood Australia. The plan IS to make a Australians a disposessed minority within their own society…as is happening with other Western countries.”

      Yes, White Americans are now a dispossed minority…… *facepalm.

  16. White/Americans ARE in many parts of America now!
    That can only worsen if let go.

    This is Australia though, NOT America! We are talking about Australia here. There were no rival colonial powers alongside Britain in Australia, we never bought African slaves here.
    It is insane that people either want to equate Australia with America or else try and hurriedly mimic America now. We safely avoided the worst mistakes and pitfalls of America for so long.
    For people to either fail to heed those mistakes, or maliciously try and repeat them here, is equally horrendous.

    What do you think is going to happen to Australians whilst ten’s of thousands of foreigners, and sizeable foreign cultures, arrive here each month? In Canada, France, Italy, Belgium and Great Britain as well the plot is underway and dire forecasts have been made of the native/White populations of these countries actually being made a minority in them before the middle of this century.
    This is a catastrophic proposition. This must be prevented.

    White/Americans are facing a severe crisis, but the roots of that problem go deep into complex American history.

    Australia was not like that, and should not be turned into that. Australia is unique. Australians have each and every right to protect themselves and their own!

  17. Hey Josh, thanks for bringing the Holocaust into the discussion. Some idiot had to sooner or later.

    I’m not supporting racism at all. I’m just expressing my disgust that you can’t question liberal immigration policies without being branded a “racist” or “Nazi” and being dismissed as irrelevant.

    I don’t doubt that you mean well, but the world’s not as simplistic as you make out. Supporting tighter immigration laws, or expecting immigrants to assimilate with local culture, has nothing to do with the worst excesses of National Socialism, such as invading other countries and exterminating their inhabitants. Suggesting it does is obscene.

    Most Western countries had less liberal immigration policies and made fewer concessions to immigrants in the past. Does that mean they were all indistinguishable from Nazi Germany? The Japanese still have some of the most restrictive immigration policies in the world. Does that make them no different from states that practise genocide?

    In case you really didn’t know it, liberal immigration policies haven’t been implemented because multiculturalism is inherently good or diversity makes countries stronger. Most Western nations have embraced them to maintain a strong consumer base and support economic growth. It all comes down to demographics – birthrates in the developed world are below replacement levels, and short-term economic gains mean more to big business and government than long-term social harmony.

    In spite of even lower birthrates, Japan has gone the other way. Its economy has stagnated and its regional influence is declining, but for now its citizens enjoy better infrastructure, lower rates of crime, longer life expectancies and better public services than those of most Western democracies. What do you value most in the end? Continued economic growth at the cost of social cohesion, or greater social cohesion at the cost of economic growth? The problems of both could be avoided through an increase in local birthrates and/or a greater emphasis on immigrants embracing the local culture.

    If our so-called ‘socialists’ were really anti-business, instead of being naive and misguided, they’d be more protectionist. Their calls for more liberal immigration play into the hands of the corporate interests they have always claimed to oppose.

    It’s easy to say multiculturalism is fine when the economy is strong and minority groups remain just that. According to the “Issues in Society” studies, less than two per cent of Australians currently call themselves Muslims. In France the number’s ten per cent, and France has seen a lot more trouble. In times of economic hardship, social upheaval or a breakdown of central government, more diverse countries fare worse again – witness Bosnia, Lebanon, Iraq or countless other failed states.

    It’s nice to know you have no problem with your multi-ethnic surroundings. Your outlook’s clearly been influenced by your limited experiences – the same goes for me as well. Just remember racism is not confined to white Australians, and tolerance will only work so long as it’s reciprocated.

    By the way, unlike the Nazis, I really do make a distinction between someone’s country of origin and their support of sharia law (for instance). What exactly is your stance on female emancipation?

    I’d fully expected to be called a racist for pointing out the obvious, but thanks again for your “Nazi” reference. It really cheapens your argument while adding further weight to mine.

    Keep this up – I’m having fun.

    • Everyone needs a scapegoat, don’t they? It’s all well and good to say that France’s 10% Muslims are creating all the trouble there. What about the discrimination they’ve experienced there? The high unemployment, the living in sub-standard ghettoes and the oppression against practising what they believe?

      Do you have any knowledge of Sharia law? Do you have any understanding of the status of women in Islam? It is obvious that you do not.

      I really do make a distinction between someone’s ignorant claims, and evidenced statements.

      • And anyone can sound smart by misquoting people. I never said the Muslims in France were causing “all” the trouble there. As I told Josh earlier, the world’s not as simplistic as you believe.

        I’m feeling rather lazy right now, so I’ll quote another source. I hope you can get through it – the best part comes at the end.

        “Be proud, do not apologise. Do we have to go on apologising for the sins of our fathers? On a world stage, should we really apologise for Dante, Shakespeare, and Goethe? Mozart, Beethoven and Bach? Rembrandt, Vermeer, Van Gogh, Breughel, Ter Borch? Galileo, Huygens, Copernicus, Newton and Darwin? Penicillin and computers? The Olympic Games and football? Human rights and parliamentary democracy? The West is the source of the liberating ideas of individual liberty, political democracy, the rule of law, human rights and cultural freedom. It is the West that has raised the status of women, fought against slavery, defended freedom of enquiry, expression and conscience. No, the West needs no lectures on the superior virtue of societies that keep their women in subjugation, cut off their clitorises, stone them to death for alleged adultery, throw acid on their faces, or deny the human rights of those considered to belong to lower castes.”

        Rhetoric from a white supremacist? These words were first written by Ibn Warraq, an ex-Muslim intellectual of Pakistani descent who moved to the United Kingdom. I’ve never lived under Sharia law, but I’ve read and heard enough to feel it isn’t right for me. I’m not with Warraq all the way though – I don’t have to be a devout Muslim to have a serious problem with the overly permissive, perpetually adolescent nature of contemporary Western culture.

        As for the oppression the Muslims have faced in France – compare it to the fate of non-Muslims at the hands of Muslims throughout history. At best they were labelled “dhimmis” and their rights were reduced; at worst they were killed and their places of worship were destroyed. I’m not pretending all Muslims are evil or their culture is devoid of merit, and nor am I pretending all Anglo-Saxons are noble heirs to a perfect culture. Do me a favour and stop pretending the world’s as one-sided as you believe.

  18. A whole lot of Muslims say Israel should be wiped off the map, but Australians who don’t want them to come here are Nazis? Good one Josh, you crack me up. I guess it’s free speech until whitey says it.

  19. Since this is apparently the best part of your quote, I shall reply to it:

    “No, the West needs no lectures on the superior virtue of societies that keep their women in subjugation, cut off their clitorises, stone them to death for alleged adultery, throw acid on their faces, or deny the human rights of those considered to belong to lower castes.”

    – female circumcision is not an Islamic practice, but a cultural practice particularly in Africa, where it is practiced by non-Muslims as well.
    – stoning for adultery is not mentioned anywhere in the Quran, rather you will find a reference to stoning in the Bible, old testament
    – as for acids and castes, neither of these are relevant or particular to Muslims, whom you continually characterise as a social disease.

    Just because someone else says it, doesn’t make it any more correct.

    I am glad though, that you are not pretending all Muslims are evil. It’s just that your previous arguments came across that way; particularly in relation to Muslims and immigration. One of the key points is that many Muslims are born here. My mother parents and grandparents were born here. My grandmother is an atheist, yet my mother decided to become a Muslim. You should be careful about generalisations, often we don’t realise we make them

    • M – thanks for your reply. We don’t get enough civility here.

      I already knew female circumcision (among other practises) was not an Islamic practise, but was picked up through trade with Africa. I’m sorry to make another generalisation, but I’d have more respect for Muslims if they spoke out against it more often.

      What you referred to as the best part of “my” quote was really part of Warraq’s quote. In fairness to you, he should have criticised certain Muslims for accepting, ignoring or adopting practises that have no place in civilised society. He could have also mentioned that the Arabs gave us calculus and had a far better knowledge of astronomy, medicine and mathematics than Europeans did for centuries.

      As I’ve repeatedly stated, intolerance and bigotry is not confined to any one race or culture. It’s easy to assume one’s own is the best, and too many of us do so when we have nothing else going for us. I daresay it’s easier when we think Allah, God or Yahweh is on our side (I’ll make no such claims myself).

      If making generalisations is wrong, I assume you’ve got a problem with all the people who have called me (and anyone else with similar views) a racist or Nazi and saying we don’t deserve to breathe.

      Muslims in France face a lot of discrimination and bigotry, which is partly a consequence of a very religious people moving to one of the most secular countries on Earth. They also receive more concessions than other groups have in the past. At the end of the nineteenth century large numbers of Jews came to Western Europe to escape pogroms in Russia, and while they received less government support and faced worse discrimination, they gave us the likes of Kafka, Mahler and Einstein. I’ll be more sympathetic to Muslims when I see more of the same from them.

      • Not sure what is worse, deluded nutjobs like Scott, raucous Fuck Off We’re Full Cronulla beach bullies or educated people like James who prostitute their skills in the name of Islamophobia.

        You are going to continue to need a supply of skilled immigrants just to staff hospitals, without even considering other areas where there is a shortfall. A doctor takes years to train, and specialist surgeons have a relatively short working life because of the physical demands of their profession. Doctors cannot work without the assistance of skilled and experienced nurses, who also experience a shorter working life than do other professionals, again because of the physical demands of the job. Both of these occupations are in critically short supply and easing the shortage means that in the short to medium term, the Government has to look overseas, whether James likes it or not.

        Allied to this shortage is the critical shortage of aged care workers. Local supply alone will not alleviate the problem. Not everyone is psychologically suited to that type of work – you cannot just conscript and retrain the unemployed.

        You are also going to need a replacement population that will provide a tax base for the future, even if you are looking to restrict population growth for environmental reasons. At the same time you cannot force people already here to have children if they don’t want to. Nor can you specify the skin colour or religion of the immigrants you bring into this country. If they satisfy health, educational and occupational criteria, that is good enough for me. If asylum seekers and refugees arrive, we have an international law and humanitarian obligation to re-settle them. Again that is good enough for me.

        And I’m not really interested in taking racists and bigots seriously enough to do them the courtesy of debating them, especially on the basis of the deeply flawed provenance of their “evidence” because that would send the wrong message.

        Racism and bigotry are illegal in this country by virtue of statutes and ensuing case law, and the weight of case law is likely to increase as individuals and groups find they can overcome the bullies by using the law. I don’t debate criminals who wish to justify their criminal behaviour. Some of them are as erudite and polished as James.

        But they are still very wrong.

      • Excuse me, but why should Muslims ‘speak out’ against a practice which isn’t Islamic and which non Muslims falsely attribute to them? How about non Muslims like us stop making shit up and then demanding Muslims distance themselves from the accusations we throw at them?

  20. Who told you that the hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees that have arrived in Australia each year for the last three years are so “skilled” Josh?
    Because the vasy majority of them…aren’t!
    It’s a lie anyway, that we all of a sudden cannot look after ourselves and need all of these ‘skilled’ foreigners to come and take care of things. This same lie is being used to promote yet further intake of migrants into Britain and Europe now.
    Just how well do you think all of those foreigners are going to “look after” our elderly? As if we cannot look after our own elderly?! WHAT society throughout history has ever thought that bringing in foreigners to look after ther elderly would be a good idea, and what society ever decided that replacing themselves with millions of foreigners woild be a good plan for ‘their’ future???
    Are you going to ‘conscript’ foreigners to work in aged care? What makes you think they’re all more psychologically suited to look after Australia’s elderly than actual Australians? What if they don’t want to work in aged care here? Because most won’t want to…and who’s going to look after them and all of their families as they all get older???
    The intended ongoing problem being, that with more foreigners you bring in, then you’re going to need more and more to eventually look after them. A self fulfilling myth, and a recipe for total disaster.
    Gee, people like you make it sound like it was a total accident that Australians were able to run a good society and nation for two hundred years, without all of those highly skilled foreign professionals and doctors to come here and do things for us!
    Most foreigners coming here AREN’T coming here to be doctors or nurses!
    None of the occupations you referred to are in ‘critically’ short supply…what is in genuinely critically short supply is the desire to train Australians in these, and the sense of self and dignity in a generation of Australians to go forward into those areas.
    Japan is NOT rushing to take in foreigners (and their entire families and racial/ethnic/cultural groups) as doctors and nurses to look after them.
    No, it’s nonsense. Australians are MORE than intelligent, energetic, and resourceful enough to take care of themselves and their own society!

    Why do you think that anyone who opposes the destruction of their own people and society is a “nutjob”?
    Do you think that anyone in other countries, and I’m talking about all countries, is a “nutjob” for cherishing and striving to protect their integrity?

    “Islamophobia”? Another of the ridiculous, contrived phrases employed by the Left today. You think there’s nothing to be ‘phobic’ of in regards expansionist Islam? Do you think that Europeans, be it in the West or the East were “phobic” to resist Islamic invasion over a period of several centuries?
    At least early Islamic powers arrived at the borders of the lands and civilisations they intended to conquer as open and honest invaders. The recent move by Muslim migrants(?) into Western countries to picture themselves as “victims” is laughable, and the portrayal of them by Leftists as “victims” is insane.

    Isn’t it ‘funny’ how left-wingers/socialists/anti-racists/liberals go ON about Australia not being a legal country because we “stole the Aboriginals land” and that we’ve ‘no right’ to our own country…BUT…when it comes to “having” to obey ‘international law’ regarding migrants and refugees…well then, NOW Australia is a sovereign state that just ‘HAS’ to obey these laws!
    To OUR detriment!

    To heck with these “laws”! They do nothing for the Western nations they are inflicted upon! We actually owe NOTHING to anyone who wishes to migrate here…and ‘refugee’ used to literally mean “taking refuge”…those ‘refugees’ arriving here intend to STAY!
    We owe NOTHING to anyone else, and we are NOT obliged to commit social and racial suicide so as to suit some entirely bogus UN statutes!
    The fare greater law is to protect and to provide for our own!
    We do NOT “have” to take in one single migrant or refugee. There should NEVER be any kind of numbers brought in that could ever endganger us being the absolute majority in our own country!

    If you took ridiculous and compromised phrases like “racist’ or “bigot” out of your dim argument, you’d reaslie you’ve nothing to stand on. Indeed, “bigot”, you’re asking Australians to roll over and play dead, to give away their society, country, and future…and By God I won’t do that!

    So-called “racism” and “bigotry”, severely compromised definitions of such, have been MADE ILLEGAL in this country…as with elsewhere in the West…so as to SILENCE the people of those countries who would naturally oppose the annexation, invasion, and loss of their countries!
    They have been MADE “illegal” by those who engineer and would profit by this.
    The rest of the world, including the massive numbers of foreigners flooding in here, or else wanting to…they keep their ‘racism’ and ‘bigotry’….that doesn’t seem to matter.

    I, and many other here, utterly reject these poultry, ridiculous ‘laws’ against “racism” or “bigotry” that have been invoked here to silence Australians!

    There is no “debate” going on, per se, here…for ‘your side’, those who wish to give Australia away and who deny the Australians right to self determination, safety, and integrity…who deny our right to defend our own society and country…have NO viable “argument” to debate”.
    You know this, and that’s why people like you…be it the street level trouble-making leftists such as yourself, or the grim power players who engineer this…will NEVER engage in open and honest discourse or debate about these crucial issues.
    You’ll hide behind your lies and deceit, and paint each and every Australian who has enough and speaks out as one of your list of simplistic PC epithets.
    Take away the weak “racist” title (though in every deeper manner we are race-ists) that you splash over Australians who speak up for their country…and you’ve got that, an Australian, concerned for their country, and keen to defend it.
    You wouldn’t deny this to any other (non-White) person in their own country. Your loathing of yourself and your own people and society is horrendous.

    Australians are NOT “criminals” to speak up for their own people and society! You should be deeply ashamed of yourself to propose so!

    It is NOT wrong to speak up for your own people, and to strive to safeguard your own society!

  21. Hi TheAntiBogan

    Just found this place, love your work. Will be reading regularly!

    Also, the APP have been stirring up shit in my own suburb lately (hate leaflets etc.), but managed a total of ZERO votes at our local polling place.

  22. Hey why why,

    If you go back a few messages, you’ll find the line about female genital mutilation, etc. that’s earned me so much flak wasn’t mine originally. I was quoting Ibn Warraq, and if you look into her background, you’ll find she’s better qualified to talk about Muslim attitudes to this sort of thing in her former country than you or I will ever be.

    She left her country for a reason, and I have no problem with immigrants who are prepared to adopt the values and beliefs that make their new countries preferable to the ones they left behind. I don’t hate or fear Muslims any more than I do Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists or neo-pagans, but I have a problem with excessive displays of religiosity that restrict individual freedoms. I also have a problem with the progressive liberals who criticise Christians (for instance) for decrying all other religions as wrong, upholding militant nationalism, opposing abortion and sex outside marriage, enforcing restrictions on hairstyle and dress, but never criticise Muslims for any of the above. If people like myself dare to, the same progressive liberals will brand them Islamophobes or racists.

    I will always have a certain respect for people who are consistent in their beliefs, even if they differ from mine. I think Australia would benefit if more people adopted a more Muslim attitude to gambling and alcohol. I don’t think it would benefit if some (Christian, Muslim, secular) lobby group forced them to. A teacher at a Western Suburbs school where 60% of the students are Muslim told me all pork products have been removed from the canteen. Just for the record, the students who have the biggest problem with this aren’t white Australians – they’re the Pacific Islanders who traditionally eat a lot of roast pig. This might not seem like a big deal, but it’s a perfect example of how excessive tolerance can bring about the opposite. Now imagine the same on a national scale. We’re unlikely to see it here, but we will in parts of Europe if current trends continue there. It won’t just be about pork either – progressives who support abortion, female equality, gay rights and secular government are going to suffer most of all.

    I don’t have any respect for people who aren’t consistent in their beliefs, whether they’re immigrants who want to escape the bigotry and tribalism of their old countries, only to continue it here, or the progressives who defend their right to in the name of “free speech” and “tolerance.” I also find it ironic that so many progressives condemn Australian protectionists (once again, I don’t call myself one and didn’t vote for the APP) while taking a protectionist view of beliefs and attitudes that are better suited to a seventh-century theocratic state than a modern democratic one.

  23. Hey why why,

    If you go back a few messages, you’ll find the line about female genital mutilation, etc. that’s earned me so much flak wasn’t mine originally. I was quoting Ibn Warraq, and if you look into his background, you’ll find he’s better qualified to talk about Muslim attitudes to this sort of thing in her former country than you or I will ever be.

    He left his country for a reason, and I have no problem with immigrants who are prepared to adopt the values and beliefs that make their new countries preferable to the ones they left behind. I don’t hate or fear Muslims any more than I do Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, atheists or neo-pagans, but I have a problem with excessive displays of religiosity that restrict individual freedoms. I also have a problem with the progressive liberals who criticise Christians (for instance) for decrying all other religions as wrong, upholding militant nationalism, opposing abortion and sex outside marriage, enforcing restrictions on hairstyle and dress, but never criticise Muslims for any of the above. If people like myself dare to, the same progressive liberals will brand them Islamophobes or racists.

    I will always have a certain respect for people who are consistent in their beliefs, even if they differ from mine. I think Australia would benefit if more people adopted a more Muslim attitude to gambling and alcohol. I don’t think it would benefit if some (Christian, Muslim, secular) lobby group forced them to. A teacher at a Western Suburbs school where 60% of the students are Muslim told me all pork products have been removed from the canteen. Just for the record, the students who have the biggest problem with this aren’t white Australians – they’re the Pacific Islanders who traditionally eat a lot of roast pig. This might not seem like a big deal, but it’s a perfect example of how excessive tolerance can bring about the opposite. Now imagine the same on a national scale. We’re unlikely to see it here, but we will in parts of Europe if current trends continue there. It won’t just be about pork either – progressives who support abortion, female equality, gay rights and secular government are going to suffer most of all.

    I don’t have any respect for people who aren’t consistent in their beliefs, whether they’re immigrants who want to escape the bigotry and tribalism of their old countries, only to continue it here, or the progressives who defend their right to in the name of “free speech” and “tolerance.” I also find it ironic that so many progressives condemn Australian protectionists (once again, I don’t call myself one and didn’t vote for the APP) while taking a protectionist view of beliefs and attitudes that are better suited to a seventh-century theocratic state than a modern democratic one.

  24. That is all the great irony, contradiction, and paradox of liberalism and ‘multi-culturalism’, James!

    We actually already have a complete, advcanced, and high culture and civilisation. We can interract with others, but ours is to be protected.

  25. Pingback: Yet Another Epic Fail: “It’s A Cowardly Racist Who Hides Behind Cars.” « Putting the Spotlight on UnAustralians

  26. Pingback: The APP Fail Again « anti-discrimination

  27. Pingback: The APP and the ADL: Working Together to Fail at a Whole New Level « anti-discrimination

What do YOU think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s