Gill Hicks: Facing death and choosing life

james milton says:

10:03am | 31/03/11

Diversity and division share the same latin root. For obvious reasons.

In a short 2 decades racial diversity has decimated the west. Just look at the UK for a perfect example.

Bruno says:

01:46pm | 31/03/11

Milton - Are you implying that one race has trademarked the west. So the east is made up of one race too. What would you classify Russia as? What about Latin America? Is France and Germany not part of the west. Both sides, east and west have always been racially diverse. Have you ever been to the UK. How do you not know that some members of society have trouble joining others because of the way they were treated when they first arrived. Please provide comment on original thoughts and don’t simply regurgigate what you’ve read on places you’ve probably never been to. Please read my comments on the article ‘Population growth is not all about immigration’ concerning why our leaders have dragged you kicking and screaming into multiculturalism.

james milton says:

07:15pm | 31/03/11

@Bruno

Yes, the west is the ancestral home of the ‘white’ people. Is that errrm.. racist? Because it’s true. Although there are many variations and tones of ‘white’, basically they all share the same culture, ie Christianity. Some are darker, say Italians or Greeks, others are pale white and go red in the sun right away. But essentially, Europe was the home of the Anglos, the Middle East of the Arabs, Asia of the Asians.. and so on. There has always been diversity, black people in the UK, white people in Japan, brown people in Canada, yellow people in Germany. it’s a red herring to suggest otherwise.

To clarify my earlier post, it’s not racial diversity per se that has done so much damage. It’s the mass importation of foreign culture, allowing ghettos to form that is the root of the UK’s (and France and Italy and Germany, add more countries at will) problems.

When I was growing up I had plenty of non-white friends, and I still do. I didn’t even notice it back then. But once government-sponsored re-education started taking place, I started waking up. Certain neighbourhoods became no-go zones for people outside that race. The public was constantly bombarded with reminders of how good all this diversity was, 1984 style. If it’s that good, why spend millions reminding us? Any dissent was met with the usual ‘racist’ tag, stifling the voices of the people who paid for and built the infrastructure and culture of modern Australia. Why didn’t they get any say at all in terms of who comes here, and more importantly, how many of them come here?

Re: your question about people being treated like crap, and therefore not integrating. I can relate 100% because I was not born here and treated like crap for many years. ‘Wog’, ‘Go back to where you came from’.. all the usual stuff. But instead of being bitter about it, it made me want to integrate all the more. The problem is that the government has virtually discouraged integration among certain races. Government forms are written in their language, free (lol, taxpayer funded) translators are provided, their own shops, schools.. you name it. Why on earth should they even bother trying to integrate, when they can establish their own corner of Australia, where they retain everything from their old country, while taking only the benefits of their new country?

Do you think the leaders of an increasing amount of European nations are wrong when they say that ‘Multiculturalism is an absolute failure’? Shouldn’t they know, after 2 decades of an experiment which has produced nothing but violence, division, factions, disharmony, lack of identity, loss of sovereignty, terrorism, ghettos, families with 8 kids (all who go to their specially segregated schools) on welfare laughing at the idiots who actually work for a living? Oh.. FOOD, yes. Diversity has brought us food.. but very little else that could be construed as positive.

Dan says:

10:16pm | 31/03/11

James miltion, racial diversity has decimated the West? Are you serious? So what, we should reintroduce the White Australia policy?!

“Do you think the leaders of an increasing amount of European nations are wrong when they say that ‘Multiculturalism is an absolute failure’? “

Well, yes, they are wrong, since Europe hasn’t attempted multiculturalism at all! How can something fail if yoy haven’t tried it?!

BTW, there are plenty of white people who do not share Christian culture.

acotrel says:

07:24pm | 31/03/11

@ Erick At least I don’t hate women! By the by,  I note Tony Abbott has found another yet group to bash - disability pensioners.  But there’s nothing original in that.  Howard gave it a fly in his last days as emperor! We’re not supposed to notice that many disability pensioners have been hived off Workcover pensions they received as a result of workplace injuries.  Perhaps the taxpayer should refuse to pay for the poor business practices of a minority? - USER PAYS?

Dan says:

10:32pm | 31/03/11

That’s coming from someone who hates Muslims, Arabs and women, and is probably anti-semitic as well.

AFR says:

08:46am | 31/03/11

After centuries of colonising, raping and pillaging such countries? What goes around…....

Macon Paine says:

09:33am | 31/03/11

@ AFR
“After centuries of colonising, raping and pillaging such countries? What goes around…....”

Are you seriously suggesting the victims got what they deserved? Or even that the bombers were justified?

james milton says:

10:11am | 31/03/11

@AFR

As usual, the current, innocent people are being made to pay for the ‘sins’ of their fathers. Where ‘sins’ is the audacity to colonise cesspools, raise their standard of living, have the gall to tell them to stop eating each other and trying to tell them to love each other and stop the tribal fighting.

Look at Zimbabwe, once the bread basket of the world. Or how prosperous Haiti was under the evil colonists. And then look at those same countries today.

The west made a lot of mistakes but just comparing the colonised countries before ‘invasion’, during ‘invasion, then again after ‘invasion’ it’s clear to see that everyone in Africa and Haiti was better off with the English in charge. Except for the tribal elders and witchdoctors.

Stop demonising the people that made these places better, and gave it a hope for the future. Demonise those who turned it back into the cesspools they are today.

AFR says:

10:20am | 31/03/11

Not exactly, but you if you are going to colonise half the world, you can’t cry foul when people from those countries want to emigrate.

Gregg says:

12:32pm | 31/03/11

I think you missed in the answers Tony that ” these ” people as in if you mean the bombers were born and bred Brits.

Bruno says:

02:53pm | 31/03/11

Milton - It could be argued that colonialism wasn’t exactly that pleasant and there was more benefits for the colonialists than the colonies which is why from day one resistance movements popped up but overall a much better argument. Except for your suggestion that the English colonised Haiti and all of Africa. Mate those pirates (pirates are bad guys remember, except in johnny dep movies) didn’t even know where Africa or the new world was until they sneaked behind like the thieving scoundrels they were.

Tony of Poorakistan says:

10:11am | 31/03/11

Did the authors say that or did they neglect to mention birthplace, whilst stating that they were schooled in the UK (and again neglecting to mention schooled by Islamic teachers)?

marley says:

10:22am | 31/03/11

But that’s the whole point, isn’t it?  Britain has had real problems over the years in integrating its ethnic populations into the mainstream, and as a result has a lot of disenchanted, disengaged young people ripe for plucking by extremist elements.  That needs to change.  That’s not to say the bombers aren’t entirely responsible for what happened, but it is to say that if efforts to integrate young Muslims don’t improve, it’s going to happen again and there will be more innocent victims paying the price.

malohi says:

11:43am | 31/03/11

You cannot integrate muslims. We should all endeavour to certainly integrate the people and accept the people. We are all human.
But how can you integrate one set of beliefs and values (not talking religious, but western society in general, our laws etc) with a set of beliefs (muslim specifically) that is in immediate contrast.

The religious who integrate and are accepted are generally the ones whom are able to compromise by using religous dogma as a guide and not letting it rule thier day to day life.
This compromise is plainly unnaceptable to many muslims and is against the teaching of thier faith.
How can we say we cherish freedom and democracy when we allow portions of society to be brainwashed to believe they can must only act according to the whim of a supernatural dictator under threat of death and torment?.

Gregg says:

12:42pm | 31/03/11

@malohi
” You cannot integrate muslims. We should all endeavour to certainly integrate the people and accept the people. We are all human.
But how can you integrate one set of beliefs and values (not talking religious, but western society in general, our laws etc) with a set of beliefs (muslim specifically) that is in immediate contrast. “

Ok, so there may be some nut cases amongst muslims but then there are also many nut cases who are not muslim too.
Different beliefs aside and the absence of muslims and non muslims mixing significantly, the same can also be said to some extent for many races and other religions and that as it may be, the majority of them likely abide by the laws of where they live.

Eduacation is a many ways street.

Erick says:

02:34pm | 31/03/11

Gregg, it is not “just a few nutcases amongst the Muslims”. It is an inherent part of Islamic belief that the duty of a good Muslim is to subjugate or convert non-Muslims.

That is the difference between Islam and other religions.

malohi says:

03:46pm | 31/03/11

Gregg, i think we are on the same wavelength.
Mt point is that we should be accepting of all people, and this is effective because human beings are able to adapt to thier society in general to live somewhat harmoniously.

However with religion, there is no adapting. It is somewhat arbitary rules by a divine power that people are told to abide by. It is not the law of the land where we can evolve it over time, it is strict rules.

It just so happens that Christianities rules are not completely incompatible with our nations laws, and many muslim rules are incompatible.
The muslims that can put the islamic rules (and traditions) on the back burner to accept societies rules as paramount are the ones that can effectively integrate. And this is a vast number of muslim people.

But many whom strictly follow islam cant because Allah strictly forbids it. (I think all religion is bs btw, but the article is indirectly promoting acceptance of islam)

Promotion of acceptance of inflexible rules can only lead to 2 scenarios;
our rules being changed to reflect the inflexible, or;
conflict.
FYI For one side conflict may include bombing trains in ironic contrast to the authors message.

Dan says:

10:21pm | 31/03/11

Erick- “Gregg, it is not “just a few nutcases amongst the Muslims”. It is an inherent part of Islamic belief that the duty of a good Muslim is to subjugate or convert non-Muslims.

That is the difference between Islam and other religions.”

LOL I love it when ignorant bigots like Erick speak about Islam. You don’t know the first thing about Islam, but then why am I surprised? Afterall, Islamophobes such as yourself never allow facts and research to ge in the way of your prejudice!

Dan says:

11:07pm | 31/03/11

malohi, there are beliefs from all religions (not just Islam) which may be regarded as incompatible with our laws (which matter more than our so-called beliefs), but as we are a secular society (and we aren’t Christian BTW not matter what some people may think), some religious people simply have to accept that they won’t always get their way. Now, to say that we ‘canot integrate Muslims’ because Muslim beliefs are in direct contrast with our beliefs and laws is not only incredibly offensive, but simly nonsense. The truth is that most Muslim beliefs are no more incompatible with our societal beliefs than the beliefs of most other religions. One does not need to give up Islam in order to be a productive and peaceful member of society. One does not need to put Muslim beliefs on the backburner at all.

Also, if the article is indirectly promoting acceptance of Islam, I say wonderful!

malohi says:

09:15am | 01/04/11

Dan, you clearly did not read my posts. So I guess you have made your mind up about me, even though I said the same thing you are pontificating to me.
To simplify. If people cannot accept that societies rules and laws are paramount if there is any conflict between the law of the land and their own religious “laws” there can be no integration, only conflict.
Most religious people can, many cannot.
If you can negate that point you will solve this whole mess.

Dan says:

09:02pm | 01/04/11

malohi, I did read your posts. You dod not merely speak about religious peole, you spoke about Muslims, and you made some incorrect and absurd comments. Don’t try to wiggle out of it by pretending that I didn’t read what you wrrote and that what I wrote is exactly what you wrote.