Former Australia First Candidate’s Credibility on Show

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.49.39 AM

What. Was that. Tony Robinson? You want. To protest Muslims. At ‘lackemba Mose’ [sic]? Aren’t you aware. Of the right. All. Australians. Have to protest? Aren’t you aware. Of the. secularity. that exists in. Australia?

Dumb shit.

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.52.08 AM

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.54.01 AM

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.55.05 AM

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 6.27.02 AM

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.40.55 AM Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.42.37 AM Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.43.28 AM Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.48.44 AM

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 5.55.43 AM

130 thoughts on “Former Australia First Candidate’s Credibility on Show

  1. I would suggest a written test as part of becoming a political candidate. We don’t need illiterate MPs ( or ignorantly racist ones, obviously ). It’s interesting to see the nomenclature of racism moving with the times. It used to be the ‘science’ of eugenics, and now it’s ‘DNA’. I wonder if these people realise how widely distributed across the human DNA range the religion of Islam is ( much as Christianity is ). Do they even realise that Muslim is a religion, not a race ? What happens when a Muslim becomes a Christian, does their DNA change ?

    • That’s how the “Muslamic” Pork/ Chicken Raygun works mate. Point, shoot and you have a brand new, genetically converted, member of Islam.

      As a bonus, it also turns non-halal meat into halal, and it’s guaranteed to get even the most stubborn fabric creases out of your burqa.

  2. That “halal” meat is something that really bugs me. There is simply no need to be cruel to animals in this modern day. We have all sorts of ways to humanely kill an animal with the least amount of stress to the animal as possible. It is the equivalent of Christians being told to not use condoms in AIDS riddled Africa just because that used to be part of the religion. As we get a better understanding of the world and technologies advance, ideas become outdated. I believe religions that do not advance with modern times have a lot to answer for.

    • Christians have never been told not to use condoms. You’re thinking of Catholics. Is Halal killing, cruel ? I thought the main cruelty was in live animal transport. the answer is obvious, we should export halal meat, not animals to be killed.

      • Yes, Halal killing is cruel.
        The non stone age methods available today are specifically designed to cause the least distress possible to the animal. we need to eat, but we don’t need to be cruel.

        Catholics are the obvious group, personally my thoughts are that some of these practices in the sake of religion are just bloody irresponsible. I think everyone should practice birth control in some form. That’s my 20 cents anyway.

        • Ronnie,
          You should probably research halal slaughter before you make such sweeping statements. The “stone age” methods, as you describe them are employed in state of the art factories run by Steggles and Ingham. What about them do you see as cruel?

        • Mate I’ve seen plenty of cattle, don’t you worry. I have no problems with the way most slaughter is carried out in this country. We need to eat, but to to kill a pig for Christmas you can just put a shot into his head and there is no suffering, or you can try and slit it’s throat while it’s struggling and making all sorts of noises and eventually the animal bleeds out and dies. There has been some good progress in farming, with your poultry, the eggs are nearly all free range, there is regular inspections, and regulations are there for a reason. It’s about improvement.

        • Actually a study where the pain receptors of calves and and sheep were measured in different styles of slaughter actually found that hallal slaughter, when carried out properly, is actually painless, whereas with stunbolting severe defensive behaviours were noticed, indicating pain: http://www.asidcom.org/Report-the-welfare-of-animals-is.html

          Also, how is hallal any different in terms of animal welfare than kosher? Why is there such alarm for hallal, but none for kosher meat?

          Personally, as a proud meat eater, I think it’s a bit ridiculous that people go around and say “They way you raise an animal, then kill it for it’s meat is wrong, and evil. Our way of raising an animal, then killing it for its meat is the way you should do it, it’s better”

          I mean, would anyone here say: “Well, I wouldn’t mind if someone killed me to eat me, as long as they did it quickly”
          No, of course you wouldn’t. Whatever way you try and do this, eating meat involves violently killing an animal. Either accept it and eat meat regardless, like I do, or refuse it and become a vegetarian. But don’t pretend that somehow your way of killing an animal is somehow “Friendlier” than others.

        • Or we can leave it at; You’re a serial troll, who has been provided with evidence against your imbecilic claims, and have not provided any supporting documentation for your often repeated fantasies, so either read the links provided and shut up Ronnie or go troll 4chan…

  3. Looking into the vacuous eyes of this man says a lot about how dangerous an idiot in company with other morons can be. Who would actually vote for this parody of humanity?

  4. Ronnie, like I said, you should do your homework before making such sweeping statements. You obviously are not basing your opinion on what mainstream Muslims consider halal slaughter. But then, the language you use to describe Muslims and their practices betrays your prejudices so I’ll not argue with you for sake of arguing.

    “I’m not racist but…”

  5. I don’t think I’m a racist, no. If you do, than you can say that if you like.

    I’m not saying “but”. I am against “halal” slaughter, plus a few other things which are only out dated religious ideas.

    I’ll say Good day to anyone, doesn’t matter where they are from.

  6. People like Tony Robinson make me wonder if some people genuinely believe they chose to be born in Australia and, hence, are superior to people who chose to be born in, say, Somalia or Afghanistan.

    Nationalism is fundamentally flawed for this very reason. Unfortunately it’s infected every country so there are self-righteous people all over the world, trying to fight off the marauding hordes from “somewhere else”.

    Maybe Globalisation, evil as it may be, will finally prove that we are all the same under our flags, prejudices and tribalism. Let’s see how civilised we are when our living standards drop and we are no longer the lucky country.

  7. I like the idea, nobody chooses where they are born, and the ones that come here I say good on you, well done. Taking it a further step back the choice is the parents having the amount of children they have. The person in Somalia should not be having 10 kids,8 kids, 6 kids. This is just making the problems worse. More people needing food and water etc. What we need is to curb the growth of these populations so that we don’t have millions of children brought into these sub standard situations. It’s much easier to provide food and water to 1 million children than it is for 8 million children. This is fundamentally where the problem lies.

    • Ronnie, you’re wrong. The people in Somalia don’t use anywhere near the resources that people in the west use, and the reason they have 10 kids is mostly that they dont expect more than a couple to survive. Improve access to health, education and contraception, and those birth numbers drop.

    • Ronnie, you’re looking at this at the wrong end. There are not food and water shortages because of people in Somalia having too many babies, people in Somalia have too many babies because of food and water shortages. Or to put it another way, they expect that some of their children will not survive into adulthood, and therefore will not be able to look after them when they are older, so have more children to better ensure they will have someone to look after them.

      The problem lies in the fact that these countries have no stability, no organisation, and no government, making it impossible to make work, houses, or any support to reduce the child mortality rate, and therefore the number of children being born.

      • JM the problem I have is this: you have sat there all day writing comebacks to everything that I have said. I appreciate discussion, but plain and simple you are trying to have a come back for everything them you come on late at night and post your comebacks. But lets actually look at some of your comebacks.

        I talk about Halal slaughter. — You say it actually causes less stress there was a study.

        The informed average person knows Halal slaughter is in fact very cruel and our modern methods of sedation, penetrative captive bolt directly to the brain, shooting directly to the brain cause far less trauma and a very rapid humane death. Nobody wants to cause any unnecessary stress to the animal. You are just a bloody fool trying to argue for the sake of it.

        • “The informed average person knows Halal slaughter is in fact very cruel and our modern methods of sedation, penetrative captive bolt directly to the brain, shooting directly to the brain cause far less trauma and a very rapid humane death.”

          How do you know that? Come on-I presented a study which actually studied the pain receptors of cattle’s minds. You have an army of informed people who agree with you, while being nameless.

          “You are just a bloody fool trying to argue for the sake of it.”

          No, I’m making a point, and showing why I disagree with you. Why is that a problem? Were you expecting everyone to go “Ronnie is right and I will never question him”?

          How is one allowed to disagree with you and present a contrary argument in a way that is acceptable to you? You’re beginning to sound more and more like the guy who accepts disagreement when it comes in the form of total unqualified praise, am I right?

        • Let me rephrase myself:

          You have come and said: “I believe X is wrong”
          I have responded: “I disagree, and this is why,” showing sources
          You repeat: “Doesn’t matter, X is wrong, because I say it is wrong, and I’m sure some people have said it’s wrong too. Moreover, you’re just trying to disagree with me because you want to”

          Ronnie, this is the truth. I disagree with you, because I hate the moral hypocrisy presented when people protest about animals. I hate how most animal rights laws are based on how cute animals are (Boil a cat, you’re a monster! Boil a lobster, you’re a chef!). I hate the false sense of superiority we put forward about other cultures (Again, “The way you kill an animal is wrong, the way we kill an animal is right!”).

          Again, if you think killing an animal for meat is wrong, don’t eat meat. If you think it’s right, then do. If you care about the animal, don’t eat it. Don’t just pretend that “It’ll be okay if I give the cow a kiss and a back rub first-then they won’t mind so much” because you feel too guilty to eat meat. Do you honestly think that the animal cares about how it will be killed , and would be okay with some forms of being killed, and absolutely reject others?

        • Ronnie, are you an angry old man who is complaining about everything in this modern life that displeases you? It sounds like you are.

          Let me put forward my case. You started with: “I don’t like hallal food” then get annoyed when someone disagrees with you.
          Then it went onto : “And kids are having too much sex, and women are getting married too late, and the wrong people are having too many kids”
          And now it’s onto: “Those tea bags, and the soft drink. It’s all bad for you”

          What you are complaining about, apart from the initial stuff about migration and hallal food, which incidentally is the only thing even slightly relevant, is people doing things differently from you. And sure, we should try to encourage people to eat well, and sure we should try and encourage positive monogamous sexual relationships, but the further you go to implement it, the more you would restrict people’s freedoms.

          And freedom means freedom to do something you disagree with.

          Seriously, I think sometimes the only thing old people and young people have in common is the belief that the world is simple and it’d all be solved if they let me run it. Whereas people in the middle tend to think instead: “World’s too complicated, I’m just going to get my own stuff sorted”

      • The fact remains that Western countries (you do know what constitutes a western Anglo country) do not experience all these problems. And your excuse for them is that it is always somehow whiteys fault.

        When Australia was settled it was nothing but dirt! Look at us now. Same with America and New Zealand.

        • Well, there’s a lot more going on that that. For example, Britain and the countries that grew out of her, built their economy through protected markets, the very thing the World Bank won’t let any country do, today. It’s not an even playing field, and never has been. Fault is irrelevant. We have more than we need. Other human beings don’t have enough to survive. Humanity demands that we help where we can.

        • I notice that you took down your reply to Westerners not having anyone to go to for refugee status or for AID money. Your reply started with Eastern Europe had problems at one stage. The one stand out that made me laugh is you talk about Eastern Europe and Serbia and Turkey. Ok North South East West we are talking about Western Europe. Anglo countries. Germany, Netherlands UK Scandinavia. When have they stuck the hand out for AID from other non western countries. They don’t.

          Just grinning over your answer to a question on Western Europe that starts with Eastern Europe. Good on ya John Thomas Morgan JM.

          The only thing that stinks around here is the fart you did in your pants. Your comebacks are pathetic mate. It’s just a case of you said tit, I said boob. Lets not argue over the name of a breast.

        • The fact remains that the countries who don’t need aid, were not always rich, and that they have defined the rules that today keep other countries poor. It’s really irrelevant, the relevant facts are, we are rich, other people are starving, and humanity demands that we recognise that the people who are starving are not lesser humans, and deserve our help.

        • ” notice that you took down your reply to Westerners not having anyone to go to for refugee status or for AID money.”

          No, I didn’t. I can’t take down replies. Only Admins can do that. Go ahead and try and take down your comments about breasts.

          “Ok North South East West we are talking about Western Europe. Anglo countries. Germany, Netherlands UK Scandinavia. When have they stuck the hand out for AID from other non western countries. They don’t.”

          Right after WWII. All those nations were destabilized and asked for money from America. And they got it.

          But now you’re going to say it doesn’t count because it was a while ago.

          Meanwhile, keep talking about poo, while trying to convince yourself you’re an adult having an adult conversation.

  8. I got my last dog de sexed because while I would love to breed her, it would be irresponsible of me if another dog got in or she got out and shagged another dog. I’ll leave it up to the dog breeders, there are plenty of dogs many with no homes. I’m not going to throw a log on the fire. This is how I see the situation in some other countries. The problems are already there, having more children is not solving the problem. The ideal, is not to immigrate to places like Australia on mass. The ideal is that their countries become safe places to live for their citizens with their own societies and opportunities for their people. Whether they copy a western model or come up with their own, they basically need to be able to function without violence and corruption, independently on their own. That is what everyone wants.

    We don’t want to see how many people we can fit in Australia, because fundamentally that solves nothing.

    • It’s ‘en masse’, not ‘on mass’. That makes no sense. Clearly, every person acts in their own best interest, not the interest of society as a whole. Australia has an aging population. We NEED younger people to come here and work, so there’s enough workers to stop the system from collapsing. People who oppose immigration act as if those coming here will not pay tax, or not use services, or not buy anything. They do all of those things. Just like the Italians and Vietnamese before them. And again, a Somali woman with 10 kids is not using anywhere near the earth’s resources that a person in the West with 1 or 2 is using, and it’s laughable to ask them to have less kids ( which is their only form of social security ), so we in the west can feel secure in the way we use more than we need. The answer really is to provide meaningful aid that gives these women a rational incentive to have less kids and expect those kids to have a chance of survival and success in life.

    • Ronnie, let’s ignore the fact you are comparing the nation of Somalia, and all it’s people, to a dog, which may be a little offensive. Let’s look into this:

      ” The ideal, is not to immigrate to places like Australia on mass. The ideal is that their countries become safe places to live for their citizens with their own societies and opportunities for their people. ”

      That would be great. Ideals always are. I would loved if the world was a peacful utopia with no one needing to flee their country to save their lives, with the only migration being because someone got a job in another ocuntry, or a couple getting married from two different countries. But life isn’t about ideals, and while while someday we may have a peaceful Earth, this is definitely not the case now, nor will it be for the next few years at least. So what to do in the meantime?

      Say you’re from Somalia. The government has just been overthrown again, and a rebel group is targetting you. Do you wait until your country becomes a safe place, and you hve an opportunity for work, dodging knives and bullets as you go, or do you get out as fast as you can?

      Take it from the other side-someone is going to be killed by one of the major insurgent groups in Somalia. Do you tell them: “No, Australia can’t accept you. Go and make your own country great, somehow while fighting off an armed insurgency single handedly” ? Does that sound right to you?

    • Why not ? Who cares where they come from ? I’d rather live next door to someone who moved here from Somalia to create a better life, than a deliberately unemployed bogan who thinks society owes them a living.

      • Yes we have unemployed Australians, but I don’t think that if someone is unemployed they are anything but a normal decent person. I have a relative who has lost his job, I don’t think any less of him.

        I don’t really use the term “bogan” because I think it encourages this binge drinking dressing down image that Australia never has been. Moderation is the go. This extra big extra, strong this and that when it comes to food and drinks is no good. A couple of beers yes, a regular hamburger yes. But this extra strong tea and coffee, extra big meals and drinking till you drop is just not what Australia is about, and to talk about the unemployed as bogans does not do anyone any good. To be Australian is not to be this “bogan” myth.

        To be completely honest here I ll put my hand up, I know very little about Somali culture. I would feel a little nervous living next to someone who had just come for a war torn country, just because I have seen some of the problems that similar groups have turned out to have. Seems a lot of them continue with some of the problems from back in Africa.

        An American or a German or a English person, no problems. I find most Americans for eg to be really friendly, big hearted people, they are real go getters, I think to answer your question I’d rather live next to an American than a Somali, purely because I think I would have more in common with an American, but it’s not often you can you choose your neighbour anyway.

        • “but I don’t think that if someone is unemployed they are anything but a normal decent person. I have a relative who has lost his job, I don’t think any less of him. ”

          Most unemployed are unemployed only a short time, Ronnie. But it is true that we have intergenerational unemployment in this country-ie people who have never worked, who have no way to show their children how to work.

          “To be completely honest here I ll put my hand up, I know very little about Somali culture. ”

          So, not knowing anything about them, you presume they wouldn’t be a fine addition to Australia? Do you think it would be fine for someone, not knowing anything about you, to judge your place in Australia?

          ” would feel a little nervous living next to someone who had just come for a war torn country, just because I have seen some of the problems that similar groups have turned out to have. ”

          Which groups from which war torn countries? Do you mean Italy or Germany (Most of whom migrated during the rebuilding following WWII)? Our Jewish population (Migrated prior to WWII during the Jewish fleeing of the Nazis)? The South East Asian (Migrating following the Vietnamese War or rising up of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia)? Or the Eastern European migrants (Fled the Bosnian war, and the reign of Milosevic in Serbia)

          All those communities settled in, and really belong in Australia now. None of these communities lead to Australia being flooded by other family members. And any other group has really been in Australia for too short a time to judge how they fit in, haven’t they?

          ” I find most Americans for eg to be really friendly, big hearted people, they are real go getters,”

          So…you meet Americans, and you think they’re nice, so you would be happy to have Americans move in, but you haven’t met Somalians so presume they’re not nice and don’t want them moving next door?
          I’m going to ask you, Ronnie, do you think your fear of Africans might be improved if you actually got to meet some of them? I mean, if all you knew of Americans was, say, crazy people going on killing sprees, you probably wouldn’t be too happy about having an American living next door. But you’ve met them, find them to be nice, so know this isn’t true.

          “I’d rather live next to an American than a Somali, purely because I think I would have more in common with an American, b”

          Again, you really don’t know that. Having not met any Somalians, you’re basing your belief on what you imagien a Somalian may be like. And as you’ve stated that you know nothing about Somalian culture, how is that anyway a reasoned judgement?

        • I would tend to meet each person, regardless of where they are from, and find out who THEY are. I go to the US a lot and I agree with your assessment, but let’s not forget that the bulk of mass shootings occur in the USA. No matter what country, the ‘bad eggs’ are always a minority, and there’s no reason to assume anything about someone, based on race. I like knowing people I don’t have much in common with, it helps me to learn about other ways of thinking.

        • When did I say that I have not met any Somalians? I have met a couple actually. I don’t know much about their culture, I’ve met Sudanese also, I don’t know a lot about their culture either. Are you an expert on East African cultures? Oh how silly of me you are an internet expert on everything!

          I’m just not sure how well a lot of these Africans actually do assimilate and get on in our society here in Australia. I do see quite a few getting on the wrong side of the law.

        • Curious minds still wonder why you see so much ( unhappy young people having sex willy nilly, law breaking Somalians, etc ). You’re the one who said you’d prefer to live next to an American to a Somalian. My point was, I make no judgements based on race. I don’t need to be an ‘internet expert’ to not be racist. And, every country has laws and police, because every country has lawbreakers. If not one Somalian who moved here broke the law, ever, THAT would be a major event. That a few do, proves nothing. Just no-one is counting how many Americans break the law here.

        • Ronnie, you said you know nothing about Somalian culture, and yet judge the Somalians as a whole. How is that fair?

          “I have met a couple actually.”

          And how were they? How did it go?

          “I’m just not sure how well a lot of these Africans actually do assimilate and get on in our society here in Australia. I do see quite a few getting on the wrong side of the law.”

          Where do you see them? Again, you say you see a lot of young people having sex, a lot of Africans getting involved in crime-where do you see this?

        • Ronnie, why are you rambling about bulls? You’ve put forward an argument, I have disagreed with it, and I explained why. You have chosen to respond by talking about poo, breasts and cows.

          What’s the problem here? Are you not used to people disagreeing with you.

  9. The question I always struggle to find answers to is : why do we not have these huge problems of violence and corruption in Australia and England the Netherlands Germany, America etc. Why do these other countries constantly require AID and help and opportunities and our countries don’t require any, we do it all on our own.

    We are always having to take in refugees, but why are there no western refugees?

    I’ve often thought about this, where do westerners go for refugee status? Which country would take us in?

    Provide us with AID?

    The only answer I can come up with is we have made a better function country, and everyone wants to come, instead of building their own.

    • The answer is obvious. The West colonised and exploited places like Africa. Those people are in the situations they are in, because our forefathers created those situations for our own benefit. Then we left, and left a power vacuum, and the worst possible people, filled it. That’s why it’s our RESPONSIBILITY to help places like Somalia. We made their problems.

      Your ‘answer’ is pure, unadulterated ignorance. Read some history 🙂

      • The trouble with the -whitey exploited these people explanation to explain all the trouble in these other countries is that a lot of these countries were not actually exploited by whitey. Somalia, or the Middle East have never been “exploited” by whitey. The very south of Africa which was chosen for a settlement, the West coast was traded with and workers and slaves taken Ironically this region of West Africa is actually the most prosperous!

        I don’t accept that whitey is responsible for the corruption and violence in these other countries. If anything the Arabs have had a lot more contact with East Africa than whitey.

        • The concept of nations was itself not how Africa worked ( it’s also not how Europe worked until a handful of hundred years ago, FWIW ). So the idea of there being nations doesn’t really make sense. In fact, some of the biggest damage was done in the areas that lost the most able bodied men to the slave trade. Regardless, the delimiter is never race or religion, it’s poverty. It’s for that reason that allowing people from those countries to come and live here, means their escape from violence, not the importing of violence in to our country.

          I would agree that trying to work out whose ‘fault’ the state of these countries is, is pointless. All that matters is that these are just normal people, the same as us, in a worse situation, and that they benefit, and our country benefits, from allowing a portion of those who wish to settle here, to do so.

    • …why are there no western refugees?

      Errr …the Balkans in the 80s and 90s? Greece, Chile, Argentina during the military dictatorships?

      Spain during the Franco era? Millions from European Communist countries up until the Berlin Wall fell?

      Post-WWII “displaced persons”?

      • Yeah there is also Bosnia etc but I’m talking Western Europe Germany, Netherlands, Uk, Australia, America would we be accepted by a non western country in the way we accept so many people from their countries? It might sound like a funny question, but all things equal would they do the same for us?

        • I am not sure anyone would stop you from moving to Somalia, if you wanted to. And, what does it matter ? The definition of a refugee is someone who is fleeing from a threatening situation. Why does it matter what the country they are fleeing, does ? How is that relevant ? Would the question of if people were allowed to move to Germany during WWII have had an relevance to the question of if Jewish refugees should have been taken in, if they were able to escape ?

        • Yeah that’s a fair point with the Jews, but that is some time back. I’m not sure if the Jews are Westerners, but fair point.

        • Jews, like Muslims or Christians, are not a race. They are a religion. Jews are different in that they WERE once a race, but now they are a group of people from all over the world. Some are westerners, some are not.

        • “It might sound like a funny question, but all things equal would they do the same for us?”

          If they could afford to, yes. You got to realise the countries that are providing support for most of the world’s refugees aren’t rich countries like Australia, or Canada. Its’ the poor ones. Most refugees are not in Western countries, they’re waiting in camps in Kenya, Jordan, Malaysia, Pakistan, etc for either a safer place to be found or a chance to be resettled in their home country.

          And, yes, there’s not been a lot of refugees fleeing from the few specific countries that haven’t been to war in the last sixty years, but that’s a very specific time frame. Things have settled in Europe, after centuries of being at war. Things are not settled in the Islamic world after centuries of being settled (Read up in the Golden Age of Islam to find out more)-countries change. Previously the big flare ups were in South East Asia-now that are has fairly well stabilised. Africa has not always had refugees coming to the west-it’s been a fairly recent change, responding to reprisals in Zimbabwe, or ethnic cleansing in Sudan and the Congo. Things change over time.

    • “why do we not have these huge problems of violence and corruption in Australia and England the Netherlands Germany, America etc”

      We did (Germany did have a particular problem with violence). Our situation has calmed down now. Other countries went through the same thing. Vietnam, Chile, Cambodia, Laos, Eriteria-all these countries had outbreaks of violence, and persecution, and then, afterwards, settled, with the number of people fleeing being reduced, and aid being reduced.

      “Why do these other countries constantly require AID and help and opportunities and our countries don’t require any, we do it all on our own. ”

      Because we are rich. That’s why. Why does your uncle need money from the Government, but I don’t get any? Because I have a job, which gives me money, and he does not. That’s why. Now if you want to tell me that money should be invested in businesses to create jobs and long term prosperity-totally agree with that. Absolutely on board. But let’s not pretend we as a nation are hard done by due to international aid.

      “We are always having to take in refugees, but why are there no western refugees?”

      There are. We had a lot of eastern european refugees in the 90’s. The situation has clamed down now currently, but you still see some refugees from Turkey, Russia, and some former soviet states. Most don’t get to Australia thought, due to the EU accepting most of them.

      “I’ve often thought about this, where do westerners go for refugee status? Which country would take us in? ”

      Canada, New Zealand, any signatory of the refugee convention really. But you actually need to be a refugee, Ronnie. You don’t get in just by saying “I want to live here”
      But it is free to apply. So if you want to go to Canada you can apply to be a refugee. And your case will be heard. You will be asked to identify how you are in fear for your life, how you are being persecuted dud to your race, religion, political belief, sexuality or culture.

      “Provide us with AID?”

      I think you’ve found we have actually received some international support during major crises (Floods, bushfires that sort of thing)-particular from the Royal family. The reason we don’t get Aid that much is we can afford to manage our own crises.

      “The only answer I can come up with is we have made a better function country, and everyone wants to come, instead of building their own.”

      I’m sure a lot of people want to come, Ronnie. But that doesn’t mean they can. Again, to be a refugee, you need to prove that you are in fear of persecution due to your religion, ethnicity, culture, race, political belief, or sexuality. I know a lot of clients who are in fear of their lives but aren’t accepted because they aren’t in fear for those reasons-they get knocked back.

      So what would you say to the people fleeing for their life: “Sorry-you need to go back nad rebuild your country. And when the Taliban come to kidnap you and kill you-you just tell them no and see if they go away” ?

      • “Because we are rich” that is the whole point. Australia was nothing to being with,all the Anglo sphere same deal, these other countries are so full of crime and corruption that they never get anywhere.

        If a problem arose in Australia we would solve it. Same with a country like Canada. You don’t just get a rich Australia at the snap of your fingers. To begin with there was nothing here.

        • You ignored this:
          “So what would you say to the people fleeing for their life: “Sorry-you need to go back nad rebuild your country. And when the Taliban come to kidnap you and kill you-you just tell them no and see if they go away” ?”

          True, in Australia we have a relatively stable country, and so we can solve problems that arise. But that doesn’t mean we don’t help others.

          After all, to go back to your uncle, it would be like saying: “Well, when I’m unemployed I prepare for it, so can still survive. Why can’t you?”

          You seem to be happy to protect the welfare of individuals, but refuse the welfare of large groups of people, ignoring the fact that groups of people are made up of individuals.

  10. Re: the “why are we more civilised than them?” question.

    You are passing judgement on these people because they are not like you. Have you considered the fact that they might have less to lose, as Christian said? I guarantee you we would all behave the same way under the same circumstances.

    Even if we agreed that the Western way of life is superior to every other, it wasn’t always the way it is now. These things go in cycles. Every dog has his day, as they say.

    A country you may laugh at now might be importing the trinkets your descendants make in a future where the tables are turned. Maybe if all you had to lose were the clothes off your back you would riot at the drop of a hat when you felt passionate about something.

    We are all the same.

  11. Ronnie, you are a moron. You have no idea of how the real world operates, and you just make shit up to fit your views and arguments. Get offended.

    The standard for meat production in Australia is that all animals must be effectively stunned (unconscious) prior to slaughter. The most common form of halal slaughter complies with the Australian standard. The only difference between this halal-slaughter method is that it uses a reversible stunning method, while conventional humane slaughter uses an irreversible stunning method. Halal slaughter overseas may not permit stunning of the animal and this is the key difference between halal slaughter in Australia and halal slaughter in some other countries.slaughter. The most common form of halal slaughter complies with the Australian standard. The only difference between this halal-slaughter method is that it uses a reversible stunning method, while conventional humane slaughter uses an irreversible stunning method. Halal slaughter overseas may not permit stunning of the animal and this is the key difference between halal slaughter in Australia and halal slaughter in some other countries.

    Oh yeah and that Robinson guy is a douche. Shame on the Nepean valley are for even voting for him at all. Scared city.

    • Yeah thanks “Bruce” your opinion is noted down on my imaginary note book. Thanks for the insult. I’ll be sure to restrain myself from an insult when you or one of your sock puppets says something I don’t entirely agree with. Thanks mate.

  12. No worries “Ronnie”. I hope it gets noted in your imaginary note book along with your imaginary views on the world too. Good luck on your migration to Somalia! Write us by imaginary postcard will you? Sock puppets united.

  13. What we need in politics are some parties that are promoting some good values. We can do better as a society. We have done well, but there is room for improvement. None of these parties are going to amount to much, but what deserves attention is instilling some good morals into society. Most people do the right thing in our society with cases like theft but what about things like relationships? They are important.

    A lot of people are marrying quite late these days and the reasons are interesting and not always obvious. Today it is more acceptable to have “casual sex” two consenting adults doing the deed. Many young people think it’s ok to have “friends” who they sleep with. This is men and women. The choice is up to the individual, the law is the only thing you actually need to comply with, but what about morals? What about hurting other people? I find this a really interesting area. Because some things have become really acceptable and it does not always benefit individuals or society as a whole.

    If someone decides to sleep with someone and then they pull out the friends card and that person become their friend, then they do this again and maybe a few times. What that person ends up with is having a friends base of people they have slept with, but being no closer to marriage. If you encourage someone along and then decide they are just a friend, you have probably “hurt” that person. It’s rare that in one of these situations someone is not going to be left “hurt”, and at the end of the day nothing has been gained. That is what I believe the reason for all these women in their 30s and men also who are still single, and have had more partners than you can poke a stick at stems from. Instead of courting people, it’s about sex then friendship. Some people also believe the concept of non serious dating or casual sex is ok also. It is perfectly legal and no one elses business if you decide to do that, but If you end up still single at the end of ten years or more of this casual business than it is nobody elses fault but your own.

    The question is how to we improve the outcomes for people in society, while still allowing the individual full freedom of choice?

    Not many people are going to marry the first person they meet, it usually takes a few relationships and dates to find a suitable person, but having a football team of casual sex partners is not really helping anyone. Really it is just hurting these poor men and women who are being led on.

    • Ronnie, the thing with morality is, you can’t legislate it. And what amuses me is that the main system I can think of that tries to legislate it, is shariah law. You know, the thing all the scare mongers say the Muslims are trying to bring to Australia.

      Relationships will always be a mixed bag, casual sex or not. Some people treat others well, and some do not. As I said, you can’t legislate morality, and while I personally waited for marriage to have sex, I am not convinced that stopping premarital sex somehow, would create better relationships on the whole. To suggest otherwise would be to suggest that relationships were happier when divorce required proving who was at fault, and social pressure to wait for marriage was a lot stronger. I doubt that was true.

      • I’m not talking about pre marital sex. I’m talking about having a football team of people you call friends of the opposite sex which are all people you have slept with. Waiting till marriage for sex I believe to be outdated and unrealistic. There is nothing wrong with having sex in a committed relationship if you are not married in my opinion anyway. What we need is a system for non religious people of values. Because religion has some good points and some out dated points. All religions.

        • Well, it was not unrealistic for me 🙂 Which just goes to show that people are all different. What do you think the issue is here, and what do you think the solution is ?

        • Issue: non serious, out of relationship sex

          Solution: still working on ideas, just interested in what other people think. : )

          I respect that you waited till marriage mate, I just think that most people probably don’t, but might be in long term relationships, which I see as better than just sleeping with “friends”.

        • Personally, I think it would be better if people waited longer before having sex. But I don’t think it’s a huge societal problem ( apart from the number of single mothers on pensions ). I don’t see how it impacts on anyone else, at all, to be honest.

        • Solution could possibly be a few values or recommendations for non religious people, because there are many good folk that are not religious at all. But it seems some values have slipped and people are into going out to have sex rather than going out to meet a man or women. Having friends you have sex with, not genuine friends. The goal has become sex not relationship.

        • Well I just outlined how it does affect others. The poor bloke or girl that is being led on and the individual themselves, none of them are any closer to marriage or a long term relationship. Often one person will use another for sex then down grade the “friendship”. This is why, yes single mothers and also people not getting married till their 30s because they seek casual encounters rather than focusing on relationships. The end result is the single 35 year old woman that does not have children or the 20 year old single mum.

        • Has this happened to you, or are you just imagining things ? I suspect that most people having casual sex, know what’s on offer.

        • LOL nah mate not me, I’ve been a married man for the last 12 years. I just see lots of young people with this attitude that it’s perfectly acceptable to have casual sex. And the point I am making is it affects {2} people- yourself and the other person. –

          *once you have been with a few people within your friends base other potential partners will see this and be put off. These are usually the ones that are relationship material.

          *One person is always going to invest more than the other person in the arrangement, it may be that you just start off having sex and then one person pulls out the this is nothing serious we are just friends.

          * I hear about some of these problems so often that I think young people today actually have it harder in finding long term partners.

        • Are you a pastor ? If not, how are you hearing about all these young people with problems ? I would bet you are in some sort of situation that self selects for people with issues. Yes, I’d agree that once someone has slept around a lot ( especially a girl ), they will find it hard to settle down with someone in that group of friends. There’s a double standard there, of course.

          Really, the question becomes, what does this have to do with politics ? Plainly it can’t be controlled by legislation. The horse has bolted, there’s no method of control that would work at all, I don’t think, assuming we wanted one. If you take religion out of the equation, you have to then ask, who is being hurt and why should the government get involved at all ? There’s always been people with relationship issues.

          And, of course, if you let migrants come in to this country, you’re likely to increase the number of people not having casual sex, at least for a generation or so.

    • Right…so you want political parties to discuss the sex lives of Australians?

      I think if you want Australia as a whole to be more conervative about sex outside of marriage, and be more committed to marriage as a whole…saying you wouldn’t like more non-western migrants is a bit of a contradiction in goals.

      • Yeah that would be good. Like the ethics classes in schools. What would you do in this situation etc. Is it wrong to sleep with someone when you are not wanting a relationship from them? Is it wrong to sleep with more than one person at the same time? Who knows the time frame in a womens cycle when she can fall pregnant?

        Things that are going to be helpful for people. The ideal is to be doing the deed with someone you are attracted to naturally not some bloke like me going after an 20 year old I think that is just using your money as power. More than 15 years age gap and your getting into the hooker territory.

        The women is not there because of natural attraction, she is there because of money or something else. And the man is there for sex. Same as a hooker, there for the cash.

        • “Like the ethics classes in schools.”

          Great. Whose ethics? Who defines what’s right and wrong in behavior, which you said, is not illegal? What if parents disagree on specifics-would the kids be allowed to withdraw from the class?

          “Is it wrong to sleep with someone when you are not wanting a relationship from them? ”

          If both parties consent and know what they’re getting into, sure.

          ” Is it wrong to sleep with more than one person at the same time? ”

          If everyone involved knows about it, sure. Not my thing, but I’m not going to legislate the sex lives of strangers.

          “Who knows the time frame in a womens cycle when she can fall pregnant?”

          So…you want people to be taught how to use contraception? totally on board with you here.

          “The ideal is to be doing the deed with someone you are attracted to naturally not some bloke like me going after an 20 year old I think that is just using your money as power.”

          So, now you’re saying any young person attracted to an older person is just using them for money, and at the same time, any similarly aged couples would not be using each other for money. Did you know that some women just like older men? Now, according to you, that’s impossible.

          “The women is not there because of natural attraction, she is there because of money or something else. ”

          Or, y’know. Sex. Women do like it. It’s not just about money, y’know.

          Y’see, this is the problem. You start saying something reasonable on a personal matter: “You shouldn’t have sex with everyone, and should try to have emotional relationship with the person you sleep with”, but when you try to implement things that will effect people’s personal lives, it works out a bit crazy: “Ethics lessons in schools-teaching what I want to teach, and showing that any older man with a younger woman is a relationship of a prostitute”

          People have freedom in this country. Freedom to have their own definition of “normal” sexuality. And what harm is there for the country? For the individual, sure, you can make mistakes, make bad choices….but that’s the same of every person in every sort of relationship. And it also has been (Older men have always been going after young people-if anything the risks are now reduced with the ease of contraception). Why is this a matter that we need to even consider at a national level?

        • But Ronnie, in Australia our birth rate is actually quite low. Again, good access to contraception helps that be the case.

          And again, why is the sex lives of some people in Australia something we need to approach at a national level? And whose ethics will be taught in the class room?

        • Wow. Just wow. How do women having sex with random, uncommitted partners, come away with cash ? And yes, our birth rate IS too low, that’s one reason we need immigrants.

  14. I think the first thing we need to do is accept that there is no one definition of morality. Even within families, let alone idealogies and cultures, people disagree on what is morally acceptable. If we are to live together peacefully we must learn to accept diversity as a fact of life.

    • I’d consider you an Australian of middle Eastern decent mate, and if I knew you and saw you in the street I would say good day to you.

    • But this is the problem. There is no ‘you blokes’. There isn’t one definition that fits the personality or views of all Muslims, any more than there is one definition that fits all Christians ( or all atheists for that matter ).

  15. How weird that people are generalising about the morality of young people. I am a young person and I don’t have a football team of people I like to sleep with that I classify as friends, nor do I go around having sex with close friends. I don’t know of anyone my age who does this AND I grew up in the western suburbs! How about that? I would consider people I intend to be intimate with more than friends, you know?

    Yeah people are marrying later, if at all. Most people are in de facto relationships – I know plenty of children born out of wedlock, myself and my child included. In fact I read some time ago around 50% of children born in Australia at the time were born out of wedlock. Doesn’t make me or any of them immoral in some way.

    “People are having sex just for the sake of it and not looking for partners.”

    Speak for yourself. I’m not sleeping around and I’m looking for a partner who is actually a decent human being that I can live a long happy life with. Sounds to me like someone has been jerked around by a few loose floozies who want sex not a relationship and now a tad bitter about it.

    • No, I’ve only been with 3 people all relationships. Current one is my wife.

      I recently heard from a young woman wanting to have children, however she spent most of her younger years basically sleeping around. I’m not going to talk about every young person in the world individually ya wally. This is a discussion site I’ll say what I bloody like, if they don’t like it they can moderate it. Simple.

    • Ronnie-how do you give values lessons to adults who are not religious? Atheists don’t meet up on the weekends to discuss atheism (Which, I believe is part of the perks of being atheist), nor do they have classes where values are brought to them.

      It sounds like you want the world to be a particular way, but other people are always going to be different. And yes, people are going to be hurt in casual sexual relationships. But people are also going to be hurt in serious sexual relationships, and serious non-sexual relationships, and even non-sexual friendships. And in many of these cases, both parties are going to be hurt as well. As the Buddhists say, connection is pain.

      Incidentally, people are getting married later not so much because they are too busy sleeping around, but more because:
      -They have jobs and careers they want to focus on first
      -Marriages cost money and need to be saved up for
      -They’re waiting for the right person, and don’t want to settle for just anyone.

      True, marriage is happening later, but if you look at the reasons women married earlier, can you really be that dissapointed? I think it’s great women are involved in the work force, able to buy property on their own, and have education goals.

      • JM, actually, a lot of atheists use Facebook groups to ‘discuss atheism’, but your point is still valid, and comes back to the fact that you can’t legislate morality. And you’re right, when marriages used to happen a lot earlier ( I bet in part so folks could get laid ), it wasn’t exactly a happy situation a lot of the time. And that women have careers today is certainly also a factor. And other factors that drive up the age people get married, are bound to increase the amount of premarital sex.

        • The worlds first Atheist “Sermon” is being held soon in an abandoned church in London.

          Pretty sure the idea is to have discussions on ethics and secularism and then group up and head into the community to help with local intiatives.

          We also had an “Athiests Club” in high school formed from those who didn’t want to participate in religious studies, or as we called them, “The God Botherers”, although the quality of discussion may have been hampered by our collective immaturity.

      • Well we could all catch up on weekends. Like old friends. Women can be involved in the work force and be married. It’s women that say I want to be a careers women and have a bunch of guys I use for sex that prevents that very women from finding someone.

        • Ronnie, if you want to organise an atheist club, where you discuss how to have proper relationships and introduce better values, then please, go ahead.

          “It’s women that say I want to be a careers women and have a bunch of guys I use for sex that prevents that very women from finding someone.”

          And that’s their right. You have a right in this country to do many things, including wrecking your own social life, if you choose. Why should that be a matter that political parties should care about?

          And true, sleeping around does reduce their chances of finding someone later on, and will lead to hurt (Though how you know so much about the sex lives of young people, crime rates among Africans, and how cattle feel when they die I would really like to know), but so do a great many other things, such as:
          -Spending a lot of time with the wrong person in a relationship.
          -Pining after a friend
          -Never getting over an ex, idolising them.

          All these things stop a person from finding a stable partner and getting committed. All these things will hurt. And why should any of them be something that a government, or even anyone but a friend or relation of the individuals concerned, actually care about?

          “Women can be involved in the work force and be married.”

          True, but many women would like their job to be secured before they step into a marriage. And to get a good job, you need a good education-that takes time.

        • Well let me know how your atheist club goes. I wish you all the best.

          I still don’t see how the sex lives of some people in Australia are a national issue though. Personal issue, sure, but not national.

  16. And here I was, getting all excited to see the large comment section post count. I thought “”Oh boy, Tony Robinson or the bogans must be going nuts.”” Instead to find one poster under the name of Ronnie stinking up the comments section.

    Boo-urns.

  17. Hate to say it but I think a few people have been sucked in by Ronnie the troll here. For a moment I thought Grandpa Simpson was reading these pages.

  18. Robinson has done nothing legally wrong. How has he broken the law? He hasn’t, in fact he is exercising his right to a voice and is standing up for all Australians. In my book he is doing what should have been done long ago, create a party that represents the people and our views. I would vote for him and I know many other people that will also. You do not know Mr Robinson personally and this is defamation of character. You will be legally responsible for what you are doing here. This is illegal!

    • Steve, you are right. And yes, democracy means that if the majority of people are as ignorant as this guy, he will get in. And intelligent Australians will weep, and if it gets too bad, perhaps look in to moving to a country where people are not so ignorant and racist.

      However, what is illegal ? For intelligent people to also have freedom of speech ?

  19. Christian you are the unintelligent one, “However, what is illegal?” Is that your question? ” For intelligent people to also have freedom of speech?” Is that another question?

    When people start talking about being intelligent on the internet I yawn and scroll down. What gives you the right to defame a man that is trying to achieve something that you never could? You have not asked Mr Robinson for permission and he does not even know about this yet. You would not do this to the prime minister, so you should realise that you can not do this to another political representative. I am actually going to make sure this is dealt with according and the relevant authorities know about what has happened here. Mr Robinson is a good man and has achieved more than you ever will.

    • Good to see people resorting to name calling. Yes, my question is, why is it illegal for this site to comment on statements this man has publicly made, but not illegal for you to call me unintelligent, or for him to defame people based on religion ?

      I think you should try to make sure this is ‘dealt with’. It will be a good object lesson for you in freedom of speech and the law. Free speech is exactly that, the right use by Mr Robinson to air his views, is the right used by this site in commenting on his views, and by both of us in our choosing to reply. That we disagree, is the essence of democracy. How can we have a democratic process if the law forbids people from criticising views they disagree with ?

      And what rock are you hiding under that you think that no-one is allowed to discuss the views of the prime minister and criticise her if they feel it is warranted ? The lack of that right is what’s called a police state.

    • Wait , you honestly think that if the Prime Minister made racist comments on a facebook page, we wouldn’t be all over that like a rash?

      Well, there’s one thing that would make us less likely to talk about the Prime Minister making a racist comment, I’ll give you that. And that one thing is:

      EVERY NEWSPAPER AND TELEVISION STATION WOULD BE REPORTING IT!

      You seem to live in a fantasy world where you have control over what you write or what you say as soon as you release it into the public sphere. So, according to you, if I walked up to your face, and swore at you, you would not be allowed to listen unless I gave you permission, and definitely wouldn’t be allowed to tell someone else.

      By the way, how exactly is it name calling when you give exact quotes from the person? I’m not asking you for my own knowledge, I’m just preparing you for what the lawyer will ask.

  20. So with a name like Christian I’m guessing you’re not a muslim, you would be happy if you were living near the site of a proposed muslim development? I bet you wouldn’t! If it’s not a mosque it’s a huge cemetary, and then there is the special schools and other centres. You are picking on a couple of Mr Robinsons literary errors on facebook. I don’t think it’s even a case of errors anyway just typing. This man doesn’t need people like you to bring him down. He needs support! Most of these immigrants can’t speak or write English, but you don’t pick on them.

    • My actual name is Christian, it’s not a pseudonym. But, I am a Christian as it happens. And yes, I could care less if I lived near a ‘Muslim development’. Why not ? Why would I care ? I’m also not Catholic, should I oppose Catholic churches and schools and retirement homes ?

      You do realise that most Italians who moved here in the 50s never went on to speak English ? It was their kids who really integrated and enriched our society. It’s normal for the first generation to struggle with a new language, or even to live in enclaves. It’s happened at least since the Chinese did it, well over a century ago.

    • “I bet you wouldn’t! ”

      I’ll take that bet. I bet you $100 that Christian would not care one way or another if they lived nearby a proposed muslim development.

      “If it’s not a mosque it’s a huge cemetary,”

      With the ongoing threat, of course, of Muslim zombies.

      ” and then there is the special schools”

      Because Muslims are scaaaary, even when they’re kids.

      “and other centres.”

      What other centres? Come on, I know about schools, mosques, and graveyards, what else are you worried about? Islamic trees? Islamic playgrounds?

      ” You are picking on a couple of Mr Robinsons literary errors on facebook. I don’t think it’s even a case of errors anyway just typing.”

      And, y’know, the whole racism thing as well.
      What is it about the extremists and their focus on spelling. So many conversations I’ve seen that can be boiled down to this:
      “You’re a racist, sexist, homophobic extremist who wants to kill kids and can’t spell”
      “Typical leftie, focusing on the spelling”

      No one gets on here because they can’t spell. They get on because they are being racist idiots who can’t spell.

      “This man doesn’t need people like you to bring him down. ”

      True, because he’ll be doing enough to bring himself down thankfully. The far right are their own enemies by far and large.

      “Most of these immigrants can’t speak or write English, but you don’t pick on them.”

      Some are unable to, true. But those migrants tend not to complain about other people being unable to read and right. Far right extremist racists do complain about English proficiency, while have lower English standards than a primary school student. Do you see the difference there?

  21. See, if anyone has broken the law, it’s you, because you just lied about me. I don’t care if people are Muslims, or Catholics, or atheists. I honestly don’t care. An Indian group wanted to build a religious building recently locally and I spoke out in support of it. I don’t agree with their religion ( that is, I believe in a different God ), but as citizens of our community, they have the right to express and live their faith. Muslims are no different. I think very little of Julia Gillard, but I see no reason to believe she’s prejudiced in the ways that you seem to take for granted.

    Why is Islam ‘not compatible with this country’ ? In what ways, exactly ? A poor excuse for Christianity resulted in children abused and taken from their parents, what makes you think the Muslims are going to do any worse ? Bad news for you, we live in an open, multicultural society. Faith is not legislated, nor should it be, and what someone believes about God really has no bearing on what sort of person they are. Must Muslims, like most Christians, are not all that fervent, they follow the faith of their family and want to live in peace.

    Tony is welcome to feel upset. Just like we’re welcome to be upset that he’s such a racist.

    • “A poor excuse for christianity” you have some hide saying that. Firstly half of it’s isn’t true. Secondly, get over what happened 250 years ago. In other countries do you realise what was happening 250 years ago? There was all sorts of things happening people killing one another tribes fighting, the rules and laws we have today just did not exist and other cultures were performing circumcisions with a rock. Nowdays we all have foreskins even some of these other religions see it as a waste of time, but back then people genuinely believed that something bad was going to happen if you did not do this and that and thats the stupidity of immigration from the third world. We are past all that. They still have slavery and violence that we don’t want here. Why don’t you actually go and see who has the most peaceful society. I can’t believe some people.

      • Nice cohesive, rational argument there Steve.

        Reckon you could make it anymore obvious that you’re an Islamaphobic Bogot.

        $1000 says any 9 out of 10 refugees from 3rd world nations would be more productive members of Australian society than you, Champion.

        So Vote for your bogan candidate and continue being a member of the noisy minority.

      • “irstly half of it’s isn’t true. ”

        What isn’t true? Please be specific.

        ” Secondly, get over what happened 250 years ago. ”

        Wait….you think that abuse of children by church leaders and forced removal of children from their parents stopped 250 years ago? You really really are blind.
        Have you not noticed the many MANY victims of clergy child abuse turning up at tribunals. Don’t you think they look a little young to be 250 years old? And as for removal of children, it’s closer to 50 years ago this was happening, rather than 250.

        And yet another far right wing person then talks about penises. Why do you guys love, straight out love talking about penises?

        ” They still have slavery and violence that we don’t want here. ”

        And naturally you can name plenty of migrants who have called for the reintroduction of slavery? The only person in the Western world I know of who called for the reintroduction of slavery was a BNP member.

        Incidentally….we actually still have both of those. Are you honestly telling us that there didn’t exist such a thing as violence in Australia if not for migrants? That guy who raped and murdered Jill Meagher-he was told what to do by third world migrants was he?
        As for slavery, do a search for “Australian sex slavery” some day before you get all high and mighty.

      • As covered before, their problems are not cultural, or racial, or genetic. They come from desperation and poverty. That’s why importing people from those places frees then, and does not harm us. That is self evident, every time a Muslim talks to me in the park, serves me in a store, or works in the cubicle across from me, without attempting any violence. You see, your caricatures fall apart when faced with real people. We don’t have a magically peaceful society, we have the sort of society you expect when people are well off. Put you and I in the third world and, given time, we’d probably act the same. You think refugees come here so they can create a society with the same problems they were fleeing ? Why ?

  22. I have nothing against Islam. In their countries they can go for it! We stay in our countries, great. Eventually some neighbouring people will sort out the extreme practices. I say cut em all of from western technology, don’t give them anything. Keep our technology to ourselves.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s