I ask you SHOUKD we be worried?

[Black Orchid]

Is there a political party in Australia that want's to control immigration? That's who you vote for.

Yes

Both the conservative and Labour parties advocate for immigration control.

I don't normally do this but I saw this a few posts up ..

I'd be more worried about your inability to spell and edit, if I were you.

Do you mean Labor?

[Nom De Plume]

Is there a political party in Australia that want's to control immigration? That's who you vote for.

Yes

Both the conservative and Labour parties advocate for immigration control.

I don't normally do this but I saw this a few posts up ..

I'd be more worried about your inability to spell and edit, if I were you.

Do you mean Labor?

Shoukd I have a rant now?

[Bogan]

To Texan.

As usual, what Brian Ross wrote was complete malarky.

Briney wrote

Virtually all political parties downunder want to control immigration. Of course, it all depends on how they want it controlled and whether that control will benefit or harm Australian society.

That is complete and utter bullshit. Australian politics have developed along the lines of the USA's "Tammany Hall" politics where New York politicians realised that the way to increase your electoral vote was to appeal to the ever rising number of immigrants, rather than try to sway the votes of the existing electorate. This was first recognised by the Australian Labor Party (ALP) which roughly equates to the US Democrats. The ALP realised that in an Australia of rising prosperity, and a ever more prosperous and aspirant working class, the old Socialist message of class warfare was not going to work anymore.

The ALP needed a new electorate, without upsetting their traditional voters so much that they would change their traditional voting allegiance. So the ALP became the champions of immigrants to such an extent, that they even championed the causes of ethnic criminals who's influence over ethnic communities could attract ethnic votes. One ethnic criminal they championed was one Phoung Nho. Nho was a Vietnamese crime boss in a "Vietnamese" electorate who tried to enter politics as a Liberal Party politician, but failed in his party pre selection. The Libs had higher standards than the ALP. He switched to the ALP because of their pro ethnic stance and was welcomed with open arms. Labor politicians swarmed to have their photos taken with Nho to snare the "Vietnamese vote".

Unfortunately, the sitting ALP member was one John Newman, who knew that Nho was a crim and who had no reservations in telling everybody that. Faced with this threat to his political aspirations, Nho did what any self respecting Vietnamese politician would do in Vietnam, and had Newman assassinated. This was the first and only political assassination in Australia's history. Isn't multiculturalism just wonderful?

Another ALP luminaire was an ethnic Italian, one Al Grassby, who became the Immigration Minister. Grassby also became known as the "Minister for the Mafia", when he succeeded in over turning the deportation orders against several notorious mafia members who had settled in his Riverina electorate, and been deported for serious criminal behaviour. This electorate had a high proportion of Italian immigrants. About this time, immigration numbers began to swell right out of control. Kinda like Europe today.

With the ALP unashamedly going after the "ethnic vote", and pissing off their own traditional working and "disadvantaged" class voters in doing so, their political opponents, the Australian Liberal Party, played "catchup" by doing the same thing. Both main parties fell all over each other sucking up to immigrants and the ALP especially was at the fore when it came to denouncing the history and culture of their own people. Every local council denouncing "Australia Day", flying the racist "aboriginal" flag alongside the Australian flag, and spreading the "Stolen Generations" bullshit, is a Labor council. And then they wonder why their own traditional voters vote for One Nation?

The ever increasing numbers of ethnic candidates is causing unexpected problems. One "Iranian" MP got sacked when it was found he was taking money from a person who our security forces identified as an agent for the Red Chinese. Another "Chinese" 'Australian, politician, who was born in China, was apparently a member of the Chinese "security" forces, joined the Royal Australian Navy, and ended up spending a lot of his time on a Chinese warship that was supposedly looking for that missing passenger jet, but which spent most of it's time looking for it around Australia's submarine base.

With both main political parties selling out their own people for ethnic votes, and both ignoring their branch members wishes and putting up ethnic candidates in their electorates, the stage was set for a new political party. This became "One Nation" and it continues to grow, attracting usually former ALP voters, but also Liberal Party voters disenchanted with their own party's cringing for the ethnic vote.

One Nation now equates to the old ALP, who once represented white, mainly working class people. And just like the old ALP which was once the party of trade unionists and sheep shearers, it is attracting the same sorts of criticisms from the other classes in society today. Kinda like Trump and his "deplorables."

Briney wrote

Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party (or as I prefer to call them, the PHONies) is perhaps the most notorious for this. She started out in the mid 1990s attacking Asian immigration. She was then gaoled for fraud. That conviction was quashed after intervention of the then Prime Minister. She was then in the political wilderness for the next 15 years before coming back to the PHONies. Now, she attacks primarily Muslim immigration. This is obviously, like her previous attacks on Asian immigration intended to find support amongst the fringe of Australian voters. It has divided Australian society and lost her and her party a lot of support amongst mainstream voters. Economically, they are a Left Wing party but socially they are a Right Wing party. They seek to control individuals in a big way.

The only thing "wrong" about One Nation is the fact that it's leader, Pauline Hanson, is a cringingly bad speaker. She is definitely no Nigel Farage. She started her new and successful political party by herself, but relied upon the advice of certain political lobbyists and insiders to help her set her party up. Unfortunately, the advice they gave her was not good, and she found herself before the court in front of an "activist" judge who sent her to jail for what amounted to only a minor breach of the rules regarding political funding.

This judge was herself jailed a few months later for Perverting the Course of Justice, by interfering in other judges courtrooms, and using her authority as Chief Stipendiary Magistrate to order other judges to find defendants guilty. Some judge. The jailing of Pauline was seen by the white working class as a Soviet style show trial, and marked Pauline for martyr status. She was released because of the furore among the public who saw her jailing as unfair, and a political lynching by the ruling classes, and their far from impartial judge.

Pauline's best asset is that this former "fish and chip" shop owner is seen by ordinary working class Australians as "one of us." She is usually mobbed by adoring crowds of Australians, wherever she goes. One of my friends was on a ferry boat when somebody recognised Pauline Hanson as being on board. The ferry nearly turned turtle when everybody on board rushed to one side of the ship to see and speak to Pauline.

Brian Ross wrote

The Greens Party seeks to control immigration but wants to bring the illegal immigrants imprisoned on Nauru and Manus Islands to Australia out of mercy. They are a left-wing party and advocate Green policies generally.

That is complete balderdash. The Greens are after the ethnic vote as well, to the extent of even bashing Israel at every opportunity. That is bcause there are 600,000 Muslims enemies in Australia, and only 100,000 Jews. Interestingly, the Jewish vote" is split between the young, professional class Jews who vote for the Greens (or lesbian independents), and the older Jews who still traditionally vote Liberal. Although, the continued attacks by the Greens on Israel is starting to make the young Jews who vote Green feel like Christian Scientists with appendicitis.

The Greens are also sucking up to the ethnic vote by advocating a border free world, and championing the causes of illegal immigrants who want to barge into the white, western societies that Brian Ross hates, but chooses to live in. The Jews, naturally, support "refugees" becasue so many of them were unwanted genuine refugees prior to WW2.

The Greens also lead the march of those who denounce every traditional value that Australians have, from our monarchy, our flag, and our culture. Their former leader, Bob Brown, opposes fossil fuel electricity, nuclear produced electricity, hydro produced electricity, and lately, wind farm produced electricity. He has not opposed solar yet, but it is probably just a matter of time. Most people, Australian and ethnic, consider the Greens and especially their leaders, as complete loonies. Extinction Rebellion and Antifa morons on steroids.

Brian Ross wrote

The Nationals are generally a right-wing party. They were formerly called the Country Party but changed their name in the early 1980s. They seek to also control immigration - so that it favours the country/regional areas of Australia which is where most of their support is. They also seek to stop illegal immigration and also to stop legal Asylum Seekers from reaching Australia. They are in coalition with the Liberals in the present Federal Government.

The Nationals used to represent "country" people but over time has morphed into representing the interests of rich pastoralists, and is on the nose with working class rural people. These "country" working class people are now switching their votes to One Nation, the only party in Australia which opposed the confiscation of semi automatic rifles and shot guns. The National Party supported the gun "buyback", much to the fury of their own working class rural voters.

Brian Ross wrote

Those are the mainstream parties. There are numerous other fringe parties with only minor support. There are also independents, with again, even smaller support amongst Australian voters.

That is not true. The Greens were once a "fringe" party which has gone mainstream. The ALP was one a "fringe" party that is now mainstream. One Nation is increasing it's support, election by election, and can now also be considered mainstream. It polled 22.5% of the vote in the formerly ALP stronghold of the Hunter Valley (it's highest proportion of a vote yet) when it rather brilliantly put up a coal miner as it's candidate in this coal mining area.

Brian Ross wrote

Many of them are basically outright racist and sectarian in their viewpoints.

That is funny, coming from a white hating and Americanphobe racist like Brian Ross. Here is what Brian says about Americans, Texan.

I don't detest Americans. In fact I quite like them. They provide me with endless hours of amusement and I actually believe they have considerable potential, once they shed their arrogance to be sensible people.

Many Americans have insufferable hubris and almost completely lack empathy for any point of view other than their own. Their ignorance about any other society is another annoying feature. Their belief in exceptionalism of course is rather annoying as well. Oh, and their propensity for electing fools to lead them but perhaps that's a symptom of the previous points?

Ever been to India, John-boy (to continue in your vein of southern redneckism)?

The first wave of Americans were welcomed in Brisbane but the latter waves weren't. They brought their usual hubris and arrogance, John. The result was the "Battle of Brisbane" or didn't your mother tell you about that. The usual comment was "Over-paid, over-sexed and over here."

Everytime I lift up a rock I find a lot of slaters underneath which hate the light being shone on their activities and that is how I feel often about the US Government and many Americans.

So, to summarise, Brian thinks that you Americans (and "Southerners" in particular) are ignorant, lack empathy, arrogant, posses hubris, and compares you to "slaters". Of course, if you were to say the same thing about Muslims, Brian would be hopping around in red faced apoplexy denouncing you as a damned, unspeakable racist. It's funny how moral puritans refuse to recognise their own racism, isn't it? Brian is a sort of political Elmer Gantry. But unlike Jimmy Swaggart, he is never going to fall to his knees in front of a camera and cry "Ah have sinned, Lord!"

Brian Ross wrote

Generally, most Australians support legal immigration. It is Asylum Seekers, Refugees and illegal immigrants where the most division amongst Australians occur.

Those who support immigration generally come from the 50% of "Australians" who have arrived in the last 50-60 year, because they want every body in their former country, city, district, or village to come to Australia, get on the dole, and turn Australia into what they said they wanted to escape from. The other 50% generally do not support immigration at all, but the political class don't give a damn what they think. But with the white race in every white homeland beginning to wake up to the fact (rather belatedly) that if they don't force their political class to change direction on immigration, they are going to commit social self suicide, the times, they are, a changin'.

Brian Ross

For myself, immigration does need to be controlled.

I am sure Brian does not believe that. Brian wants that no more white people should be allowed to immigrate to Australia, but non whites should just flood in. The Greens even oppose the immigration of South African whites and Rhodesians on the grounds that they are all "racists." Which just goes to show how all Brian Ross moral puritans clones are unable to recognise their own racism.

Brian Ross wrote

We are far enough away and disconnected enough from other countries to manage it easily. Asylum Seekers are legally allowed to claim Asylum, no matter what the Government or their supporters might prefer. Refugees are Asylum Seekers who have been granted that status, either on our borders or overseas in Refugee camps and brought here by the Government.

Australia is disconnected from the rest of the world by the width of the Timor Sea, which most Australians wish was considerably wider. Brian's advocacy of "refugees" is entirely the result of the fact that these "refugees" are not white. 'White" refugees like Boers and Rhodesians are not welcome. And diluting the white race in their own homelands, hopefully right out of existence, is Brian's Quixotic dream.

Brian Ross wrote

Illegal immigrants get what they basically deserve for circumventing the Immigration laws. However, despite what is claimed, illegal immigration is basically ignored by the Federal Government in favour of attacking the easier policed Asylum Seekers who arrive primarily by boat. Visa overstayers are the largest source of Illegal Immigrants and need a great deal more policing IMO. Of course, that'd mean we'd be seeing queues of primarily White, European tourists being paraded through airports and put on planes and sent home. Not a good move for the Government.

"Asylum seekers" are simply the most visible of those people intent upon barging into Australia by any means whatsoever, so they get the most attention. The Rudd Labor government opened Australia's border to "asylum seekers" and was overwhelmed at the response when tens of thousands of "boat people" suddenly descended upon the shorelines of Australia in fleets of boats. That Labor government was hurled from office by the angry electorate. This taught the ALP one thing. Immigration and sucking up to "asylum seekers" is not popular with their traditional voters, so they can't push it too far.

This began a balancing act within the ALP. They could not support "refugees" too much, even though the green left "activist" class within their own party ranks demanded it. The ALP leaders knew that supporting 'asylum seekers" would see more of their traditional voters defect to One Nation. So they tried to be both. Pretending to support strong borders, and pretending to support asylum seekers at the same time. It is a policy that is not working. All it has done is anger both sides who can both see the total hypocrisy.

[Black Orchid]

Those who support immigration generally come from the 50% of "Australians" who have arrived in the last 50-60 year, because they want every body in their former country, city, district, or village to come to Australia, get on the dole, and turn Australia into what they said they wanted to escape from. The other 50% generally do not support immigration at all, but the political class don't give a damn what they think. But with the white race in every white homeland beginning to wake up to the fact (rather belatedly) that if they don't force their political class to change direction on immigration, they are going to commit social self suicide, the times, they are, a changin'.

Let's not forget that our most heavily laden crime areas are overflowing with immigrants from third world countries, many of whom don't even care to learn the English language. Thugs in their late teens and early 20s on disability running drugs and wielding guns. These areas are also Labor ('liberals' to the US) strongholds.

The survey that Brian loves to refer to citing that 85% of Australians are in favour of multiculturalism is skewed. Respondents were paid $10 each for participating and it was sent out in 10 different languages. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out how many took the $10 and then filled it out in 1 of the 9 other languages required (other than English) and what their response would be. If it were a true representation of Australians it would have been in ONE language. English!

[brian ross]

Let's not forget that our most heavily laden crime areas are overflowing with immigrants from third world countries, many of whom don't even care to learn the English language. Thugs in their late teens and early 20s on disability running drugs and wielding guns. These areas are also Labor ('liberals' to the US) strongholds.

You are speaking about Sydney, aren't you, Black Orchid? You do realise that Sydney is not representative of the entire Australian population, don't you?

The survey that Brian loves to refer to citing that 85% of Australians are in favour of multiculturalism is skewed. Respondents were paid $10 each for participating and it was sent out in 10 different languages. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure out how many took the $10 and then filled it out in 1 of the 9 other languages required (other than English) and what their response would be. If it were a true representation of Australians it would have been in ONE language. English!

Ah, but that $10 was only paid to a panel (a subset) of the total sample, Black Orchid which consisted of approximately 150 (10% of the total sample). Approximately 20 interviews were made in languages other than English. That is approximately .75% of the sample total of 1500 respondents. Not all Australians are proficient in English, Black Orchid. You are ignoring the Indigenous Australians, Torres Strait Islanders and recent immigrants who don't speak English fluently. As usual, you choose to distort reality in your Xenophobia.

85% of Australians support Multiculturalism. Face it and accept it. You want to change that you'll need to do a lot better than supporting the Xenophobes like the PHONies.

[Black Orchid]

I am speaking of the areas where almost all of these immigrant groups are 'settled' which happens to be Sydney and Melbourne. You cannot compare Sydney or Melbourne to Podunk. So, no, I am not saying Sydney is representative of all of Australia but I am certainly saying it is representative of the fallout, crime and violence brought about by too much third world welfare dependent immigration dumped in these cities.

If I moved to France I would not expect to be given a survey on immigration in English (just in case I couldn't speak the language of the country I chose to move to) nor would I expect to be offered money. Yet here you are saying that 85% of 1500 respondents, many of whom were paid and/or could not speak English are representative of 25 million Australians. That's extremely disingenuous tsk tsk.

How many Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders filled out the Survey, Brian? Which language did they understand and choose? Mandarin, Cantonese, Arabic, Vietnamese, Italian, Japanese, Urdu, Hindi, Greek?

[Valkie]

Most of my mates and family are wogs

My uncle is a Lebbo
My best man was a new Zealander
My groomsman was a Ukrainian
My wife's bridesmaid was an abbo
Her matron of honor a Swede

There were 17 nationalities at my wedding
My many and varied mates.

Now
Not one of them is in favor of continued immigration at this time.
They realize THAT our country has reached its limits.
They are also seriously dirty about the type of scum being allowed into our country.
Muzzos and Somali monkeys being their greatest complaint
Especially my Lebbo uncle, who's family left Lebanon to get away from the barbarity and religious intolerance of the Christian Lebbs.

I think that give you some idea of the demographics who hate what is being allowed to infect our country now.

And to add insult to injury
We have just let in a known pedophile under the medivac agreement.
He should be thrown from the plane on the way over.

Filthy scum

[brian ross]

I am speaking of the areas where almost all of these immigrant groups are 'settled' which happens to be Sydney and Melbourne. You cannot compare Sydney or Melbourne to Podunk. So, no, I am not saying Sydney is representative of all of Australia but I am certainly saying it is representative of the fallout, crime and violence brought about by too much third world welfare dependent immigration dumped in these cities.

Really? Yet, you will find that crime has actually decreased in Australia and most particularly in Sydney over the last 100 years, Black Orchid. I think you need to get out of Sydney and go and see what the rest of Australia thinks of that city...

If I moved to France I would not expect to be given a survey on immigration in English (just in case I couldn't speak the language of the country I chose to move to) nor would I expect to be offered money. Yet here you are saying that 85% of 1500 respondents, many of whom were paid and/or could not speak English are representative of 25 million Australians. That's extremely disingenuous tsk tsk.

As I said, only 20 respondents required to take the interview in a language other than English, Black Orchid. 20 out of over 1500. 150 (10%) of the 1500 respondents were paid $10 to appear in a panel followup survey. That is not going to affect the outcome of the findings of the survey by any significant amount. You keel trying to claim the reverse. 85% of the respondents - who were all Australians BTW - said they supported Multiculturalism. You have to deal with reality, Black Orchid and stop hiding from it. 85% of Australians support Multiculturalism. QED.

No matter how much you claim the reverse, reality says otherwise, Black Orchid.

How many Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders filled out the Survey, Brian? Which language did they understand and choose? Mandarin, Cantonese, Arabic, Vietnamese, Italian, Japanese, Urdu, Hindi, Greek?

20 respondents took the questionnaire in a language other than English, Black Orchid. 20 respondents. As I keep pointing out that is an insignificant number. I'd have actually thought you'd be proud that the overwhelming majority - 1480+ respondents were able to cope with English adequately - which runs counter of course to your views.

[Black Orchid]

I need to face reality?

Claiming that 1500 specifically targeted respondents (10% of which can't even speak English) represent 25 million Australians is delusional and it's you who needs to face reality.

Rape has risen in Sydney by over 40% since 2000 or do you not consider rape to be a crime? Most of these vicious rapes are perpetrated by welfare dependent ethnic minorities.

Like these good old boys you seem to applaud ...

The Sydney gang rapes were a series of gang rape attacks committed by a group of up to fourteen Lebanese Australian youths led by Bilal Skaf against Anglo-Celtic Australian women and teenage girls, as young as 14, in Sydney Australia

[brian ross]

I need to face reality?

Yes, you do.

Claiming that 1500 specifically targeted respondents (10% of which can't even speak English) represent 25 million Australians is delusional and it's you who needs to face reality.

I wasn't aware that you were innumerate as well as illogical, Black Orchid. 20 respondents is 10% of 1500 respondents? Really? Oh, dear.

As for 1500 respondents representing the views of 25 million Australians, you need to acquaint yourself with statistical theory, methinks, Black Orchid.

Rape has risen in Sydney by over 40% since 2000 or do you not consider rape to be a crime? Most of these vicious rapes are perpetrated by welfare dependent ethnic minorities.

According to the Bureau of Statistics, Crime overall has fallen in Australia in the late 100 years. You do understand what the word "overall" means, don't you, Black Orchid? The definition of "rape" has changed in that period and today, reporting of crime has improved considerably compared to what it was 100 years ago. So, now you have a broader definition of the concept of "rape" accompanied by women more willing to report that they have been sexually assaulted, this equates to the crime of "rape" being closer to the true level in our society than it has been in the past. That doesn't mean that it's increased at all, Black Orchid.

Like these good old boys you seem to applaud ...

Who?

The Sydney gang rapes were a series of gang rape attacks committed by a group of up to fourteen Lebanese Australian youths led by Bilal Skaf against Anglo-Celtic Australian women and teenage girls, as young as 14, in Sydney Australia

[/quote]

You have evidence that I have ever "applauded" any Rapists, ever, Black Orchid? If you do, please present it otherwise I will be forced to conclude that you are, well, using an ad hominem attack against me. Tsk, tsk.