"IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT"

Discussion in 'The NAAFI Bar' started by TangoZeroAlpha, Jun 9, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Sorry I do not have a source link as this was emailed to me by a friend in Aussi land

    The right to leave Australia... (Umm UK)

    After hearing that the state of South Australia changed its opinion and let a Muslim woman have her picture on her driver's license with her face covered prompted this editorial written by an Australian citizen, published in an Australian newspaper. He did quite a job? Read on, please. you decide if you agree.

    Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT".

    I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians. However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia. However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand. This idea of Australia being a multicultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. As Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle. This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom We speak ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, American or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!

    'In God We Trust' is our National Motto. This is not some Christian, right wing, political slogan. We adopted this motto because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture. If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like (A Fair Go), then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from.

    This is OUR COUNTRY, Our Land, and Our Lifestyle, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about our Flag, Our Pledge, Our National Motto, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, THE RIGHT TO LEAVE.

    Passing this to our friends (and enemies) it will sooner or later get back to the complainers, let's all try, please.
     
  2. One day, one of our mainstream British politicians will say something very like that.








    Oh, God, who am I kidding? :(
     
  3. When I read something like that it just confirms my personal views on Islam.
     
  4. Fantastic, but the minute anyone pushes this around the net you'll be villified for being a racist xenophobe and end up in law courts.
     
  5. I'll give it a go and see what happens (with your permish, TØA). At the first mention of 'racism' or 'diversity' I'll report back...
     
  6. Rod924

    Rod924 LE Reviewer

    He is only stating what 95% of the population thinks! As for the driving licence I was a bit surprised that the Aussies allowed women to drive! Learn something new everyday.

    Wonder if there are any similar UK licences knocking about? Perhaps a new religion could be created whereby it is against the belief to let a camera lens see you face and in order to keep the faith, one should always wear the 'brownbagkha' which, of course, has eye holes?
     
  7. I take it the auther of the letter was not an Aborigine then!
     
  8. No source, no link and a variation of the 'Mexican' story?

    Naafi Bar.
     
  9. That link has a classic riposte to the original text. I haven't counted them, but number of references to 'racism' has a high wordcount, as do other nasty Right-wing epithets (Nazi etc). There's a piece written in the Spectator this week by Pete Brimelow about immigration to the USA ("Mexican Wave") which the author of that riposte and others who think in a like fashion should perhaps study.
     
  10. In relation to the above topic:

    Muslim Women must show face for Drivers License

    There was a case here aswell concerning a women of the aforementioned faith. When stopped by Police she refused to show her face claiming it infringed her religious freedom!, so the scuffers removed it for her pronto. She then filed a complaint/sued the Police authority. Of course it was thrown out, but it is shocking that they think they're exempt from our laws because of their 'religion'; the same one that stones them for not cooking on time!

    Apparantly if you fly to some middle-eastern states they remove any 'christian' paraphanalia from you on entry. If you visit the Vatican or such like you respect their 'laws' and wear long pants/sleeves etc. If you come to a western country you show you face so we can see what you're up to!
     
  11. There is already a precedent with the Sikh exception to the crash helmet law.
     
  12. I'd have thought this differs in that if a sikh falls off with no helmet he's dead - game over; no risk to public.

    However, if Abu Hamza or such a scrote goes around in a full burka(?) slotting people then when acosted claims his 'right' then it's against the public interest.

    EDIT: I know he's not female but the same principle applies - If asked you should identify yourself.

    How is a Policeman expected to tell if its Mrs ahmed or not from a picture of two eyes through a slit?
     
  13. I have a flat in the Socialist Republic of Tower Hamlets. When I used to work at Canary Wharf I'd get the bus into work & several times per week I'd see hijab-wearing women getting on the bus using photo-ID bus-passes! How does that work?!
     
  14. On the original topic.

    Goodness me. That article. Changing America to Australia. How droll. I am surprised they did not just say <insert name of country here>.

    Some of the sentiment I do agree with to an extent, some I do not. I do feel that if you wish to move to another country you do so because you like that country and its culture and not because you wish to transport the country you leave with you and set it up in the new one (and force others to live as you used to in your previous country). I feel this surely would be even more the case if you were fleeing your country due to imminent personal safety concerns. Perhaps mine is an overly simplistic view. Then again I am extremely lucky to have been born in a country that an increasing number of people see as a "good place to migrate."

    I love the fact that Australia has benefitted immensely from the positive parts of different cultural heritages that migrants have brought with them. Australia would be a lesser place if it were not for the fantastic contribution made by immigrants. I am less than impressed at the negative parts that some insist on bringing with them which affects everyone else. Australia has an extremely interesting history, both indigenous and non-indigenous, and could potentially have an interesting future if we are able to retain that odd "Aussieness" which you can still find lurking that the PC-brigade has not yet managed to eradicate.



    On the second topic of the thread.

    I realise that some religions and individuals have needs that may not be the same as mine but in the interests of the entire community I do not feel a single photograph stops you practising your religion the other 23.58hrs a day available to you. How about if I want to wear a motorcycle helmet for my photograph? I feel I have a right. I feel you are "infringing on my personal freedom of expression" if you stop me doing so. I suspect I would be told, in no uncertain terms, to get a grip. How about if I wished to go to an Islamic country and dress in the manner in which I am accustomed in Australia (shorts and singlet tops)? I do not think they would listen to my protest that "my religion does permits me to dress this way".

    It does seem quite unhelpful, to say the least, to allow individuals to obscure the major identificatory features on an item used for official identification. This would seem to render the driving license of this woman open to abuse as any other woman of similar build and eye colour, whom has never driven in their life, could borrow the license and a car and go for a spin. I do hope it only stays as a one off occurrence in SA and does not infect the rest of the country, nor spread to other forms of identification. I apologise if I seem a little paranoid but having seen over the last few years some of the blantant attempts by a (thankfully) small number of less than law abiding individuals attempting to access services illegally using borrowed/stolen/bought ID it would seem that this would be a godsend.

    Thank heavens Australian passports have it clearly stated on the application that "if a head covering is worn for religious reasons, we will accept a photograph of the person wearing it, but the facial features from bottom of chin to top of forehead and both edges of the face must be clearly shown". This I feel is more than acceptable as the head is able to remain covered and really how many times does one drag out their passport or DL when they pop down to the shops for milk. The only times I have ever been asked to produce my DL or passport have been for official identification going through customs or on RBT checks when driving.

    Any overly devout Muslim males whom object to male officials gazing upon the visage of their chatte...I do apologise...their womenfolk can surely request that female officials only, in an area away from the public gaze, may verify the identity of the women by asking them to remove their facial veiling.

    Then again this could be a secret government plot to push for retinal scan/fingerprints/DNA on ID rather than photographs :lol: :wink: