Call to stop Muslim immigrants (1 Viewer)

[bshoc]

THE NSW election campaign has become entangled in a debate over Muslim immigration after the leader of the Christian Democratic Party called for an immediate halt to Islamic immigrants.

Reverend Fred Nile, the longest-serving member of the NSW Legislative Council, made the comments at a gathering in the Sydney suburb of North Ryde yesterday.
He said there has been no serious study of the potential effects on Australia of more than 300,000 Muslims who are already here, and Australians deserved some breathing space.
In the meantime, Australia should extend a welcoming hand to the many thousands of persecuted Christians who are presently displaced or at risk in the Middle East.
"I pray that within a decade, Muslims in Australia will clearly have demonstrated their commitment to Aussie values including democratic pluralism and the rights of women. We can then assess whether Muslim immigration should begin again," he said.
Mr Nile is leading 21 Christian Democratic Party candidates contesting seats in the NSW Legislative Council at the March 24 state election. Some 53 Christian Democratic Party candidates are also running in Legislative Assembly electorates across the state.
NSW Premier Morris Iemma, whose southwestern Sydney seat of Lakemba has a large Muslim population, said today he did not agree with Mr Nile's comments but said immigration was a federal issue.
"Those that are prepared to abide by our laws, our values, work hard and pass the criteria are welcome regardless of who they are, where they come from, the colour of their skin," he said.
The Ethnic Communities Council (ECC) of NSW rejected Mr Nile's statements, saying the overwhelming majority of Australian Muslims were law-abiding citizens.
"We must avoid policies that echo the old White Australia policy," ECC vice chair Justin Li said.
"Religious and national backgrounds should never be the criteria for determining a person's eligibility to migrate into Australia or to become an Australian citizen."
Opposition leader Peter Debnam would not today if the Liberal Party would rule out doing preference deals with the Christian Democrats at the election.
- with AAP

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,21362128-421,00.html

See above. Additionally how much validity is there really for a state party to be discussing matters of federal politics, perhaps immigration should be delegated to the indavidual states or even further into city areas or councils as to not create ethnic ghettos?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Additionally how much validity is there really for a state party to be discussing matters of federal politics, perhaps immigration should be delegated to the indavidual states or even further into city areas or councils as to not create ethnic ghettos?

That would probably require a change to the constitution, section 51 (27).

 

[Optophobia]

perhaps immigration should be delegated to the indavidual states or even further into city areas or councils as to not create ethnic ghettos?

Immigration was one of the key reasons for federation in the first place. To delegate it to the states would be pointless, because if one state lets an immigrant in, then that immigrant gets access to any other state anyway (which is basically what we already have).

Australia should extend a welcoming hand to the many thousands of persecuted Christians who are presently displaced or at risk in the Middle East.

Oh yes. Being the good strong christian nation we are (*VOMITS PROFUSELY*), we should be doing this, i agree.

will clearly have demonstrated their commitment to Aussie values including democratic pluralism and the rights of women.

And all "Aussies" have demonstrated their commitment to "Aussie Values".. Much like those Aussie truck drivers who whistle at chicks in bikinis, and think that women don't have a place in the defence force, police force or other MALE jobs.

One thing that these bad Muslims do observe (the imaginary "bad muslim", as created by the media) however, is the persecution of Homosexuals, so i assumed that Fred Nile would love them?

Homophobia is an Australian value, right Freddy?

We can then assess whether Muslim immigration should begin again,

Assuming the position of 'native' much?

He fantasizes that it's he (or 'we') who have the power to say what should happen in immigration. A power that he manifestly does not have (thank Christ).

But uh... Despite this being a federal issue, i think it's interesting that Fred Nile is suddenly bringing this issue up less than 3 weeks out from the election? co-incidence? Or could it be that, like his cock-smoking conservative friends a federal level, he knows the power of exploiting white fear and white xenophobia close to election time?

Perhaps he hopes to gain votes even though this has absolutely nothing to do with state politics and that what he suggests is NEVER actually going to occur.

 

[bshoc]

That would probably require a change to the constitution, section 51 (27).

Ofcourse, but its possible with a commited legislature.

Devolution has generally been successful in the Western countries where it has been implemented in some form.

It's arguably also in breach of Section 106.

Section 106 of what exactly? There are many section 106's

 

[bshoc]

Immigration was one of the key reasons for federation in the first place. To delegate it to the states would be pointless, because if one state lets an immigrant in, then that immigrant gets access to any other state anyway (which is basically what we already have).
Oh yes.

No the reasons for federation were:

1. Military
2. Trade

All other things the federal government has snatched away over time, most recently, water.

Being the good strong christian nation we are (*VOMITS PROFUSELY*), we should be doing this, i agree.

What else do you call a country where every three of the four people you talk to on the street are christian?

Assuming the position of 'native' much?

He fantasizes that it's he (or 'we') who have the power to say what should happen in immigration. A power that he manifestly does not have (thank Christ).

Despite this being a federal issue..

Who has the say in what happens in immigration if its not "we" ?

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Section 106 of what exactly? There are many section 106's

The commonwealth constitution.

 

[Nebuchanezzar]

Lol, hilarious. I betcha Steve Price will be defending this idea come Monday afternoon. I voted yes for the hell of it though.

 

[Optophobia]

No the reasons for federation were:

1. Military
2. Trade

All other things the federal government has snatched away over time, most recently, water.

There were numerous reasons for federation.

What else do you call a country where every three of the four people you talk to on the street are christian?

Yeh i know, i was agreeing. We clearly are a strong christian nation. It's just so obvious by the mass of threads on this forum devoted to peoples love for Jesus.. And, the mass of programs on TV dedicated to blissful worship. We are a strong christian nation alright. If you walk down the street praying to god, it's a sign of coolness.

Who has the say in what happens in immigration if its not "we" ?

Not you.

 

[jb_nc]

Don't really want Australia to turn out like France.

 

[Optophobia]

I don't want to turn out like France

there for

I agree with Fred Nile.

I pray that you have enough brain cells to see the error in your logic?

 

[jb_nc]

I don't want to turn out like France

there for

I agree with Fred Nile.

I pray that you have enough brain cells to see the error in your logic?

Err, did I say I agreed with Fred Nile?

 

[Indian Princess]

There is no need to change the law, simply refuse their visa application and they have no rights to challenge their visa rejection abroad or in australia. Pure and Simple. yes only admit the X-tian ones , people who will not support suicide bombers or will not try to destroy australia and kill its people. Then again these desperate muslims will probably have phoney conversion to xtianity anyways. So ban them all !

 

[bshoc]

I don't want to turn out like France

there for

I agree with Fred Nile.

I pray that you have enough brain cells to see the error in your logic?

In judging an opinion on its merits it shouldn't matter whether it was proposed by the CDP, Greens or anyone else.

 

[Optophobia]

Err, did I say I agreed with Fred Nile?

You infered it by what you said. Else, what relevance does what you said have with this thread?

 

[jb_nc]

You infered it by what you said. Else, what relevance does what you said have with this thread?

No you inferred it. Don't infer. It has the relevance that France has ethnic slums full of immigrants that cannot get jobs, simply I do not want Australian to have those same problems but the government should not stop Muslims immigration to achieve it.

I didn't vote in the poll.

 

[bshoc]

There were numerous reasons for federation.

No, the two listed were pretty much the start and end of it.

Yeh i know, i was agreeing. We clearly are a strong christian nation. It's just so obvious by the mass of threads on this forum devoted to peoples love for Jesus.. And, the mass of programs on TV dedicated to blissful worship. We are a strong christian nation alright. If you walk down the street praying to god, it's a sign of coolness.

There are four cows at a watering hole, 3 drink the water and one drinks its own urine, thus observing the one drinking its own urine does not in any way inference what the other 3 cows are doing.

Not you.

I would assume not you either then?

 

[Optophobia]

There is no need to change the law, simply refuse their visa application and they have no rights to challenge their visa rejection abroad or in australia.

Yes and who is going to implement this wonderful plan of yours?

No one. Because it's not viable and it's getting caught up in the moral-panic-of-the-day.

Pure and Simple. yes only admit the X-tian ones , people who will not support suicide bombers or will not try to destroy australia and kill its people.

Never going to happen.

Then again these desperate muslims will probably have phoney conversion to xtianity anyways. So ban them all !

You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, Bshoc.

 

[JayB]

what about refusing emigration of jews? or africans? or christians?

this seems way to holocausty for my liking. you cant refuse someone on the basis of their race or religion. discern their beliefs, and judge them by those. i'd like to think australia has progressed from "we have no racial problem, we have no wish to import one".

 

[Optophobia]

No, the two listed were pretty much the start and end of it.

Oh, reference?

Because i'm pretty sure that in year 10 History there were 7-10 reasons for federation.

There are four cows at a watering hole, 3 drink the water and one drinks its own urine, thus observing the one drinking its own urine does not in any way inference what the other 3 cows are doing.

What?
Stop bringing your mum into this.

:rofl:

I would assume not you either then?

Nope.

 

[Optophobia]

No you inferred it.

No, you infered it. You pretty much gave support to Fred Niles.

It has the relevance that France has ethnic slums full of immigrants that cannot get jobs, simply I do not want Australian to have those same problems

OH Australia has plenty of jobs available. We must, because John Howard has let in record numbers of immigrants for about 10 consecutive years in a row.

but the government should not stop Muslims immigration to achieve it.

Then what is your suggested solution to prevent us becoming like France? And seeing as you are saying this in a thread which is about Fred Niles suggesting that we should stop Muslim immigration, i assume that's what you meant?

If it's anything else, then do you have a habit of posting random comments in threads?

I didn't vote in the poll.

Excellent?
I did, i voted in favour of Fred Niles