Call out in a loud voice: “Hypocrisy”

The Australian political establishment has been in overdrive today. Fraser Anning (who?) used the words “final” and “solution” in the same sentence in Parliament. For reader guidance I’m going to reproduce the entire two paragraphs that surround that hateful and terrible combination.

Finally, it should go without saying that, as a nation, we are entitled to require that those who come here not only have useful work skills and qualifications but also the commitment to work and pay taxes. In truth, it appears that many of those who claim to be asylum seekers are actually just welfare seekers who only come to Australia to live on welfare in public housing at the expense of working Australians. In the days of Menzies, immigrants arriving here were not allowed to apply for welfare and that attracted exactly the right sort of hard-working people this country needed. We should go back to that and ban all immigrants receiving welfare for the first five years after they arrive.

The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote. We don’t need a plebiscite to cut immigration numbers; we just need a government that is willing to institute a sustainable population policy, end Australian-job-stealing 457 visas and make student visas conditional on foreign students returning to the country they came from. What we do need a plebiscite for is to decide who comes here. Whitlam didn’t ask the Australian people whether they wanted wholesale non-European migration when he introduced it and neither has any subsequent government. Who we allow to come here will determine what sort of nation we will have in the future, so therefore this isn’t the right of any one government to decide. It’s too important for that. Instead, we need a plebiscite to allow the Australian people to decide whether they want wholesale non-English speaking immigrants from the Third World and, in particular, whether they want any Muslims or whether they want to return to the predominantly European immigration policy of the pre-Whitlam consensus. I for one will be very happy to abide by their decision.

The whole speech is here.

As a consequence we have had crying, and group hugs. In the Parliament. An outbreak of bipartisanship condemning this sort of thing.

Okay.

What if he had said, “I propose we have a plebiscite on immigration” instead of, “The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote”. Would that have changed the meaning and intent of his speech one iota? 

I suggest “No”.

So let’s examine some tough factoids and realities.

  • According to Essential Media 49% of the population want to ban Muslim immigration to Australia. I am not one of that 49% – I think a statistic like that is damning indictment of our national leadership. It is a failure of liberal discourse.
  • The appalling treatment of asylum-seeking coming to Australia is bipartisan policy.
  • The mandatory detention of asylum seekers without trial has been policy since the 1990s – introduced by Paul Keating.
  • Offshore detention of asylum seekers to prevent judicial oversight of their plight has been policy since the late 1990s, and is now bipartisan policy.

Both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party have pursued appalling policies in government – yet both these parties are outraged that a minor party unknown backbencher used a poor combination of words to call for greater democratic participation for policy development in this area?

As most Cats know I’m an open borders person. I think, however, that the arguments need to be made. Simply dismissing Anning’s concerns (and, to be frank, a huge chunk of the electorate) because he used the phrase “final solution” and not engaging with them head on is a mistake. It is also a mistake to suggest that these views should not be expressed in the Parliament. When you live in a democracy ideas that don’t get debated in public often end up being debated in the Parliament.

I’m all in favour of more plebiscites and less representative democracy – the gay marriage plebiscite was a very successful experiment –  and I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds.

This entry was posted in Australian Story, Hypocrisy of progressives. Bookmark the permalink.

195 Responses to Call out in a loud voice: “Hypocrisy”

  1. pete m

    Well said, save that the gay marriage plebiscite was carefully engineered with one side gaining relentless media support. The Immigration plebiscite would be likewise stage managed and anyone disagreeing with open borders labelled a nazi.

    Our current crop of MPs are 99% bet wetting nincompoops.

  2. John Constantine

    The bipartisan harsh treatment is for those that paid crime cartels to get into Australia by boat.

    Cartels operating as migration agents selling Australia as a product that you fly into by airplane have bipartisan political support and taxpayer funding.

    All in the presentation, Australia is corrupt, but you have to learn to play the game correctly.

  3. A Lurker

    Personally I think Fraser Anning was trolling parliament, and the whole of parliament (including all the media) and most everyone else with just half a brain, bit hard on his bait.

  4. John Brumble

    Gosh, Elle, it’s almost as if English words can be used for more than one thing on their own or in context. How you cope with words lime “set” which have meanings in the multiples of ten, I don’t know.

  5. Elle

    It’s all about the “context”, isn’t it John.

  6. Jock

    I dont agree with you on immigration but I agree on the need for open debate without a bunch of elites and virtue signallers yelling “racist” or “discrimination”.

  7. Yohan

    Using the phrase ‘final solution’ was unnecessarily and has allowed the left to start wailing and it has detracted from the message.

    But I cannot fault anything else in his speech, I am in total agreement.

  8. Sinclair Davidson

    John / Elle – it gets worse. The English translations of German words can only have one meaning.

  9. Infidel Tiger

    Great column Sinc.

  10. Infidel Tiger

    When you live in a democracy ideas that don’t get debated in public often end up being debated in the Parliament.

    I don’t quite understand what you mean here though?

    We are desperate for immigration to be debated in the parliament but the uniparty won’t allow it.

  11. Fat Tony

    OK Sinc – say, in 35 years, the population of Australia is 50% Muslim.

    Tell me what you think Australia would be like? Better or worse??

  12. Yohan

    In the entire west, no political establishment has ever allowed a debate on whether white people becoming a minority in their own country is desirable. Before the 1990’s they would shout you down and say its crazy talk and will never happen. Now they say its inevitable and you are racist to want to discuss it.

    Chris Kenny on Sky attacking Fraser Anning yesterday is a perfect example of the later view. For him we have ‘moved past that’ i.e it’s now a done deal and you cannot talk about it. This is the cowardice of the establishment right.

  13. Sinclair Davidson

    IT – people will vote for politicians to say these things in the Parliament.

  14. Infidel Tiger

    Tell me what you think Australia would be like? Better or worse??

    The only metric they consider is GDP.

    It’s a terrible form of autism.

  15. Sinclair Davidson

    OK Sinc – say, in 35 years, the population of Australia is 50% Muslim.

    I don’t see it happening. In any event, so what? I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

  16. .

    OK Sinc – say, in 35 years, the population of Australia is 50% Muslim.

    WTF?

    The only metric they consider is GDP.

    It is how you measure living standards. Make up a better method.

  17. Makka

    I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

    It hasn’t worked thus far with Islam this theory of yours. In fact it’s gotten worse.

  18. Fat Tony

    Sinclair Davidson
    #2790046, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:10 pm
    OK Sinc – say, in 35 years, the population of Australia is 50% Muslim.

    I don’t see it happening. In any event, so what? I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

    Islam has been pretty constant for 1400 years – it cannot and will not change.
    It is an supremacist ideology that will not stop until it is destroyed or its host is assimilated and subsequently destroyed.

    Do you really think Australia with 50% Muslim population would not be any different than it is now??

  19. Makka

    GDP, Reeeeeeee!

    No skin in the game, dotty.

  20. Gary

    I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.–sinc

    Its not working in the ME.

  21. mh

    Looks like ‘final’ was planted deliberately, as there is no need to use final, only solution. Any one aware enough to write a political speech would notice ‘final solution’ straight away.

    If it was deliberate in order to get the speech noticed, it worked. All a bit daft, however.

  22. Stimpson J. Cat

    I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds.

    If it’s good enough for Israel, it’s good enough for me.
    Ethnostates for everyone!

  23. Habib

    What exactly are the benefits of moslem migration? Kebabs? The Greeks, Druze and Maronites do them quite well, without the explosions, splatter pedestrians, welfare hoovering and hadji recruitment. I’m all ears.

  24. Death Giraffe

    It is how you measure living standards. Make up a better method

    ..
    living standard = (H/C^2) + t
    where;
    H = number if big titted blonde girls.
    C = cumulative age of all chiko rolls on display.
    t= average commute time.

  25. Death Giraffe

    I think I gave t the wrong sign.

  26. .

    That is such a stupid solipsism Makka.

    You’d probably care about GDP per capita if your IQ jumped 20 points.

  27. AussieMaga

    “I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds”
    – Why?

    Communal interest is the basis of all morality – not individualism like libertards like to pretend (although individual ‘rights’ can promote communal interests, but not always).

    Every community has a shared identity that promotes cohesion and trust (some communities more than others).

    Ergo, diversity is a threat to community. So, Anning is not ‘wrong’ in wanting to exclude people who are significantly different (he is moral in terms of promoting communal identity and interests), but he is not ‘correct’ (i.e. politically correct).

    You’re a public figure and you’ve got a rep to maintain, so you will be politically correct, but not ‘right’. Me being anonymous grants me public honesty, but no social status. That’s how these things work.

  28. Mater

    I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

    As long as my Grandchildren aren’t being traded as the commodity.

  29. Roger

    If it’s good enough for Israel, it’s good enough for me. Ethnostates for everyone!

    Well done, Stimpson.

    For a crazy person you have an admirable grasp of the ars rhetorica.

    😉

  30. Clam Chowdah

    I don’t see it happening. In any event, so what? I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

    I think you’re negligently naive.

  31. Fat Tony

    dot
    #2790051, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:13 pm
    OK Sinc – say, in 35 years, the population of Australia is 50% Muslim.

    WTF?

    I know you like reading a lot of books, but i work in the real world.

    Sometimes, when looking for the effect of something on a system, go to extremes. Try zero and then try 100%.

    If you wonder what the effects of Muslims in Australia would be, try a high percentage and see what would happen. Then compare that with 0%.

  32. mh

    It is how you measure living standards. Make up a better method.

    Dot, when you have one of the highest immigration rates in the world, it is sensible to look at per capita GDP growth. And that’s not so flash here in Australia.

  33. Habib

    IT – people will vote for politicians to say these things in the Parliament.

    If they had any on the ballot, unpossible with the uniparty who are in furious bipartisan agreement on everything that fucks this place up completely.

  34. .

    Communal interest is the basis of all morality

    No. Two wolves voting to eat a sheep is moral, is it?

    not individualism like libertards like to pretend

    Okay fuckwit. We decide to outlaw you. You have NO rights and we can legally treat you like a punching bag, gun range target, pin cushion, love doll or ashtray.

    Do you love da morality yet?

  35. Candy

    Religious fervour is much stronger than rampant consumerism. In fact at the heart of it is rejection of Western excesses.

  36. Fat Tony

    Death Giraffe
    #2790067, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:20 pm
    I think I gave t the wrong sign.

    Yep – try t = 0 and t = 1000

    Definitely should be -t

  37. .

    I know you like reading a lot of books, but i work in the real world.

    Post some “real world” figures then and don’t be a smart arse until you’ve earned the right.

    Sometimes, when looking for the effect of something on a system, go to extremes. Try zero and then try 100%.

    If you wonder what the effects of Muslims in Australia would be, try a high percentage and see what would happen. Then compare that with 0%.

    I thought you lived in the real world, not books.

    Evidently not. Another “reading is for fags” fuckknuckle.

    mh
    #2790077, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:25 pm

    Hmm yes I mentioned per capita figures not long after. It is sort of rude to presume people aren’t looking at both.

  38. Yohan

    If it’s good enough for Israel, it’s good enough for me.
    Ethnostates for everyone!

    This is the one time you find Tony Abbott, Greg Sheridan, Andrew Bolt (and the rest of the oz neo-con right) suddenly become militant adherents of racial ethnostates.

  39. John Brumble

    I said nothing of the sort, “Elle.” That’s ok, though. Now you know that I was talking about the capacity of English words to have different meanings and that summarising that as a single word from my explanation is disingenious at best and flat out dishonest at worst, you can go back and have another crack at it.

    Sinc- Indeed. I’m not a fan of Anning or his views, but this acting as if he’d described it as Endlösung is hysterical garbage from a class of people (and to be clear, I mean the political class) who seem hell bent on goving effet to actual facsism via control of speech. Let one million voices be heard… even if they say a lot of tosh.

  40. Fat Tony

    dot – go fuck yourself, you ignorant shit.
    I think being a 65 year old design / commissioning engineer has earned me the right to be a “smart arse”.
    And “my world” is a combination of books and reality, you dickhead.

  41. Makka

    dotty,

    You’re another open borders loony so no surprises that you will roll all sorts of slop, including GDPeeeeeee to support your idiocy. You don’t give a fk about the future, no kids so no skin in the game. You don’t give a fk about this country’s standard of living and never will until you have skin in the game. Like Turdball, the greens and the left you want high immigration. Probably because you’ve never travelled anywhere besides Walgett. So stfu about the IQ of others sport at least until you come up with ideas you haven’t read from your textbooks.

  42. mh

    Hmm yes I mentioned per capita figures not long after. It is sort of rude to presume people aren’t looking at both.

    I know our MP’s don’t talk about both. Scott Morrison should be held to account every time he mentions GDP, seeing the pain and inconvenience Australians are put through to get a GDP outcome.

    As Bob Carr says, building blocks of flats for immigrants is not agile or innovative.

  43. Stimpson J. Cat

    Simply dismissing Anning’s concerns (and, to be frank, a huge chunk of the electorate) because he used the phrase “final solution” and not engaging with them head on is a mistake.

    Oh I agree with you.
    I think the below final paragraph from an article published today in The Guardian perfectly encapsulates the title of this thread:

    The specter of fascism, of unabashed Hitler enthusiasts on our networks and first speeches calling for a return to a migration policy that would have excluded many of the Australians who have made the greatest contributions to our country, is alarming to Australian J$ws. More than that, it shows us a collective amnesia. The origins of genocide lie in permissive bias and discrimination, and the migrant hordes we now so fear are no different to the “refos” and “rootless cosmopolitans” we thought would never become proper Australians.

    Alex Ryvchin is the co-CEO of the Executive Council of Australian J$wry

  44. Candy

    The hugging and crying in Parliament was ridiculous. If it was about the tragedy in Genoa it would have been touching but no it was about two silly ill chosen words by a little known senator.

  45. .

    You don’t give a fk about this country’s standard of living and never will until you have skin in the game.

    So I won’t care about living standards until I have children? Not before?

    How incredibly stupid. You’ve also now given yourself a basis to pay attention to living standards which you think is “autistic” to consider.

    You must be running a parody account. This lack of self-awareness is astonishingly stupid.

  46. Yohan

    Saying that Muslims should be banned because of a history of intolerance is a bad argument. Because at times in the past Christians and other religions have also killed and wiped out peoples based on their beliefs.

    So it gives the leftists a counter argument. The past doesn’t matter, what matters is the cultural attitudes of people right now.

    By any metric Muslims are an obvious and easily identifiable risk group for immigration. Just go look at all the PEW Research and Emerson polling done on western Muslim attitudes to homosexuality, sharia law, suicide bombing e.t.c they have per capita rates 100x higher for support for intolerance and terrorist attacks. This is per capita.

    When you have an easily identifiable group that is 100-200-300x per capita more likely to support terror attacks this group should be excised from the immigration program with prejudice.

  47. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Your A.B.C. wheels out Tim Solarpanelrebate on the issue. They also wheeled out Douggie Cameron. Fraser Anning had one advantage over Our Douggie – he was speaking in the English language.

  48. .

    Fat Tony
    #2790092, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:33 pm

    dot – go fuck yourself, you ignorant shit.
    I think being a 65 year old design / commissioning engineer has earned me the right to be a “smart arse”.
    And “my world” is a combination of books and reality, you dickhead.

    No no no little mate. YOU can go fuck YOURSELF.

    Go and run the figures on how Australia will be majority Muslim in 35 years you wild lunatic. That is figure you just pulled out of your arse. If you’re so smart, you can prove it.

    Or you can fuck off, dumbarse. Put up or shut up.

  49. Death Giraffe

    Stop fucking about on Catallaxy and go make some children Dot.
    You have two arms and two legs.
    You can’t be that hideously ugly.
    Find a nice conservative bint to set you straight and go to it man.

  50. .

    I know our MP’s don’t talk about both

    What a low standard. We’re talking about Emma Husar and Peter Slipper here.

  51. .

    Death Giraffe
    #2790113, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:43 pm

    If you like weirdo Mummyblogging, piss off and go to Essential Baby.

  52. Yohan

    Dot are you a woman? I have not been here for a while but thought that was the case. Maybe my memory is going.

  53. Open borders? In a welfare state? You must be mad.

  54. Death Giraffe

    Point is, the skin in the game argument is valid.
    You don’t have it.
    If you do, you start noticing things you wouldn’t otherwise.
    Things about the state of education, how you get forced into state run things like medicine, which are then shit because they can’t cope with the population coming in.
    You notice these things only when you show up at a ER at 3:00AM with a desperately sick child. And see that the systems you are forced into in a socialist country don’t work alongside out of control migration.

  55. Roger

    Saying that Muslims should be banned because of a history of intolerance is a bad argument. Because at times in the past Christians…have also killed and wiped out peoples based on their beliefs.

    Pace Yohan:

    The founder of Christianity renounced the use of the sword for religious purposes.

    The founder of Islam advocated it.

    When Christians have used the sword in the service of religion they have been unfaithful.

    Many Muslims, otoh, believe the use of the sword is a mark of faithfulness, and rightly so according to their lights, offensive though they be to us.

  56. H B Bear

    Cartels operating as migration agents selling Australia as a product that you fly into by airplane have bipartisan political support and taxpayer funding.

    Unis you mean? Buy a degree and get a free set of steak knives Australian permanent residency thrown in.

  57. mh

    Let’s see what Blair has to say. No, not Tim….

    Blair Cottrell 🇦🇺
    Blair Cottrell
    @blaircottrell89
    ·
    5h
    Media bureaucrats really overplayed their hand in the week-long tantrum they threw at me for speaking on Sky News last Sunday.
    The extreme bigotry and effrontery of these Leftists in the media is the catalyst driving a new national awakening in Australia.

  58. Death Giraffe

    The state crowds outthe middle to lower end of the health and education systems, then fills them with high need new arrivals.
    You would understand this stuff if you were in the game.
    At three to five years behing asian education systems, you don’t have to do this for long and it becomes unrecoverable.

  59. Fat Tony

    dot
    Go and run the figures on how Australia will be majority Muslim in 35 years you wild lunatic. That is figure you just pulled out of your arse. If you’re so smart, you can prove it.

    For a dickhead who likes to quote bullshit from books, you are incapable of understanding what I wrote.
    You truly are a pathetic little shit.

  60. Yohan

    Roger, I agree with you and am fully aware of the distinctions, but pointing to the last 400 years of Muslim barbarity as a reason for why they should be rejected, still gives the left an easy way out by pointing to something like the Cathar genocide (even if its is a false equivalence).

  61. .

    The state crowds outthe middle to lower end of the health and education systems, then fills them with high need new arrivals.
    You would understand this stuff if you were in the game.

    I understand it well before I was a mature adult, the idea that having kids is the only “skin in the game” is just stupid, let alone as to where I may want to permanently domicile or actually raise a family.

    If it took you having children to realise it – no offence, but maybe you’re a bit dopey.

    Yohan
    #2790118, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:47 pm

    How do you respond to this without umbrage?

    All I’ve done really is stick up for myself, but this thread is about the hypocrisy of the uniparty. Have at them.

  62. Fat Tony

    Yohan
    #2790118, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:47 pm
    Dot are you a woman? I have not been here for a while but thought that was the case. Maybe my memory is going.

    I’m pretty sure a few years back that dotty said something like why do you hate us during a session discussing the merits of islam. He/She/It gave the impression of being a muslim. It would explain his/her/its muslim obsession.

  63. rickw

    and I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds.

    So you would be ok with mass migration by unrepentant actual Nazi’s?

  64. Yohan

    That wasn’t why I asked if Dot was a women. I asked because someone earlier said Dot should shack up with a conservative bint and man at it. It would be funny if he was a she. But then maybe a ‘she’ would still want a conservative women? who am i to judge?

  65. .

    I’m pretty sure a few years back that dotty said something like why do you hate us during a session discussing the merits of islam. He/She/It gave the impression of being a muslim. It would explain his/her/its muslim obsession.

    I’m pretty sure you need to up your dosage of Clonazepam and Thorazine old mate.

  66. Death Giraffe

    If it took you having children to realise it – no offence, but maybe you’re a bit dopey.

    ..
    You only think you get it.
    You really don’t.

  67. Yohan

    All i know is Dot is intelligent, has studied economics, but has a few glaring faults like being for open borders, and believing the most childish and obvious media propaganda – such as the Syrian government being responsible for chemical weapons attacks while winning their civil war.

  68. .

    Why the fuck are you trolling me with Russian propaganda (that Trump did not fall for) on a thread dedicated how the uniparty fucks over microparties?

    I’m out, discuss the issue.

  69. Roger

    Roger, I agree with you and am fully aware of the distinctions…

    OK, good; but it really is a substantial difference, Yohan, and not just an accidental one (to use Aristotelian terminology). There are reformist, peace loving Muslims (e.g. the Ahmadiyya), but they have to apply some very creative exegesis to the Quran to justify their position and are usually rejected by their co-religionists. But in the end it’s academic, since we have a non-discriminatory immigration policy, all cultures and religions being equal, as our political class imagine.

  70. Cameron

    Only someone with little of no understanding of Islam and Islamic culture and history would want to keep importing more Muslims. The only countries in Europe without Terrorist activities are the ones like Poland and Hungary, that do not have any Muslim immigrants. WS continue to allow Muslims here at our own peril.

  71. rickw

    Saying that Muslims should be banned because of a history of intolerance is a bad argument.

    It’s nothing to do with history, it’s NOW, easily within one lifetime.

    I have visited and worked in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, UAE and several other muslim countries. In addition I’ve lived in Melbourne’s pe-eminent muslim suburbs.

    Anyone who doesn’t think that islam is a problem is guilty of gross projection.

    You also conflate a nice conversation, a gift of dates, a shared sweet tea, a welcoming handshake or a broad friendly smile as being representative of the underlying ethos. It most surely isn’t.

  72. hzhousewife

    The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote.

    If only Fraser Anning had said “the ultimate solution” or some other combination of words, no-one would have been aroused from their slumber and the entire speech would have passed as unremarkable.
    Reminded me of something my dear ole Dad used to quote:

    “For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,
    For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,
    For the want of a horse the rider was lost,
    For the want of a rider the battle was lost,
    For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost,
    And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail.”

    ― Benjamin Franklin

  73. 2dogs

    I’m all in favour of more plebiscites and less representative democracy – the gay marriage plebiscite was a very successful experiment

    This could be how the Libs win the next election – pledge more plebiscites.

    The ALP’s opposition to the gay marriage made it seem a bit antidemocratic. Not much in that case, because of their psychological impact argument, but if they keep opposing them, it won’t be a good look.

    Whenever the Libs get challenged to guarantee a promise, they should promise a plebiscite if they change their minds. It will disable tactics like Mediscare.

  74. Tel

    IT – people will vote for politicians to say these things in the Parliament.

    But if the politicians cannot speak openly in public to begin with… how does anyone know who they are supposed to be voting for?

    Only by at least starting with a public outline of the basic positions can we ever get to the point where these things even get the slightest consideration in Parliament, let alone move along to the stage of a referendum and/or plebiscite.

  75. Clam Chowdah

    The 50% figure is a straw man. It’s well known that a Muslim minority population only needs to reach 10% or so to become stridently uncompromising.

  76. Tel

    Open borders? In a welfare state? You must be mad.

    You wanted to get rid of the welfare state didn’t you? Well… now you can.

  77. struth

    and I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds.

    My god.
    As the viking hordes (boat people) hit the shores of England………..they should have just been let in…says Sinc and dot.
    And no,….there is no difference now.
    There’s killing and raping those who are not their own.
    The immigrant invader who groups together under a religion and culture of their own and violent toward others IS discriminating. ..violently, based on religious and cultural grounds.
    FMD.

  78. Dave of Reedy Creek, Qld

    Before we reject this previously unknown senator and his speech, could we all take a long careful look at France, Spain, Britain, Germany and Sweden among others. Each of these former ‘western’ countries have been colonised by Islam in huge numbers. Can we also look at why we have so many Muslims turning up in our own country and many others? Internal bloodshed, murderous jihads, feuding sects etc against their own people, huge numbers of people leave those countries and bring exactly the same ideology with them and re-create exactly the same situations in the host country. Try also the issues of child brides, female circumcision, sharia law and more. Add to that, the very real fact, the Islamic plan for world domination is openly declared yet we all turn a deaf ear and bury our head in the sand. For the author to say he believes in open borders must be a joy to the people smugglers in Indonesia and beyond. That concept must be the most absurd idea ever to come out of a human mind. Wonder how wonderfully we would be received in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Pakistan as a lively Christian for example telling the world we were going to eventually take over and demand we be kept by the state.

  79. Leo G

    Looks like ‘final’ was planted deliberately, as there is no need to use final, only solution.

    The final solution in this context is the last one in a series of proposed solutions.
    Syntactically, if not contectually, it was the same in Hermann Goering’s 1941 letter. There had been a series of proposed responses to the Nazi’s “J£wish Question”. Up to that time the prospective final solutions included the “Madagascar Plan” (sterilisation and deportation).
    The ultimate J£wish Holocaust plan was not referred to in the letter as “The Final Solution” but rather the “Total Solution of the J£wish Question” and the actual proposal (the Wannsee Plan) was not resolved until the following year.
    As I suggested in a related thread, those using Anning’s reference to “the final solution of the immigration problem” to claim he was race-baiting by asserting moral equivalence with the Nazi plan- when clearly he was doing no such thing- are themselves doing a bit of race baiting.
    It’s the kind of behaviour we have come to expect from Bill Shorten- and increasingly from the present PM.

  80. Crossie

    Infidel Tiger
    #2790025, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:00 pm
    When you live in a democracy ideas that don’t get debated in public often end up being debated in the Parliament.

    I don’t quite understand what you mean here though?

    We are desperate for immigration to be debated in the parliament but the uniparty won’t allow it.

    Correct, all they talk about are inanities, things that are irrelevant to most people out there in the real world. Canberra is after all the capital of that unreal land of Oz.

  81. Marcus

    What if he had said, “I propose we have a plebiscite on immigration” instead of, “The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote”. Would that have changed the meaning and intent of his speech one iota?

    I suggest “No”.

    Maybe not, but anyone who uses the phrase “final solution” and appears to be unaware of the connotations of that phrase is just flat-out ignorant. Bob Katter’s defence was that Anning spent his early adulthood laying concrete pipes in far north Queensland so never got an education, so presumably doesn’t know what the Final Solution was. In that case, has he heard of the Cold War? 9/11? What exactly qualifies this clown to be a senator?

  82. Crossie

    Candy
    #2790102, posted on August 15, 2018 at 9:38 pm
    The hugging and crying in Parliament was ridiculous. If it was about the tragedy in Genoa it would have been touching but no it was about two silly ill chosen words by a little known senator.

    I didn’t think they could be more ridiculous but they worked hard to achieve that result.

  83. Oh come on

    Anning is either malevolently using the term ‘final solution’ with full intent, or he is so historically ignorant that he had no idea of its significance.

    In a perfect society, he would be disqualified from holding public office in either case. However, we are not a perfect society.

    It is a pity. This is a conversation that needs to be had. We need the boors to knock the PC door down. We also need capable leaders to harness the political momentum appropriately. The idiotic warning that “we’re in danger of being swamped by Asians!!1!”* resulted in a system that kept out a large number of Islamists for almost a decade. Today, nobody is there to make use of Anning’s dunderheaded but potentially useful clarion call.

    *with the benefit of two-plus decades of the flood, you’d want to go back and ask the-then Member for Oxley if she could assist in opening the floodgates a little wider

  84. Perth Trader

    Of all the comments in this thread the only one that confused, concerned and worried me was Stimpson use of the words, “rootless cosmopolitans” . It might be just me but it reminded me of wasted Friday nights when younger.

  85. struth

    We are worried about offending a culture and religion that is offended by the existence of any others to the point of violence.
    Sorry, not me.
    I don’t want murderers in my house or terrorists who hate us on our streets.
    The government are accomplces and in reality the instigators of islamic violent hatred enacted out on the citizens of our country.
    They are violent traitors.
    Our government is at war with us.
    Forget the fact that their first duty is our security.
    They are importing violence against us.

  86. None

    Good article, Sinclair. I must admit when I actually read the speech I just wondered what all the gnarling and gnashing of teeth was about. In fact, even his use of the “final solution” is totally innocuous and cannot in any sense be associated with Hitler’s capital F capital S; anyone who suggest that is being deliberately and willfully malicious and engaging in that sort of thought policing which Hitler’s goons were masters.
    However once again you are wrong on the homosexual marriage “plebiscite”. It was not a plebiscite, it was not conducted under the law for plebiscites, it was a postal survey barely different from a census, although one could argue that our politicians were twisted and mendacious and mirepresented it as a survey but now use it as some sort of permanent millstone around our necks. 52% of Australians did not actively indicate support for legalising gay marriage and the minute that postal survey was completed it was already out of date with people indicating they had since changed their mind and of course every successive generation of people will have different opinions anyway- as if you could somehow redefine marriage, humanities oldest social institution- by the ignorance of a small group of people and a Qantas CEO at any time. And if we can change it once we can change it again and even repeal that law (in fact Australia no longer recognises marriage. It has public servants’ approved love contracts – God how pitiful -but that presents all sorts of interesting possibilities in the future).
    Moreover, there ni reason why we should have a non discriminatory immigration policy, and anyone who thinks we have a non discriminatory immigration policy now is deluded anyway. A truly non-discriminatory immigration policy is open borders which virtually no one except the lunatic left, including the libertarian left propose (provided of course all those dregs that pour in don’t move into their pristine suburbs). Even so, as Sinclair said you have to make a case for it because as I say there is no moral argument for non discriminatory immigration (there is no “ought”), and there are plenty of good reasons for a discriminatory immigration program including the very simple fact that they are infinitely preferable to any other alternative.
    Every immigration policy is by its nature discriminatory in that the host nation decides what sort of people it wishes to allow to settle among its people. Even frau Merkel isn’t totally non-discriminatory. It when a nation doesn’t discriminate enough in its immigration policy that it becomes stupid.
    Australia is stupid if it thinks it is a successful multicultural country – in fact the present debates show that if it ever were, it no longer is. Australia is also totally stupid in pretending it is some sort of generous nation by providing asylum for the persecuted when it also provides asylum for those very same peoples’ persecutors and imports and recreates the very same conditions which led to that persecution here. It is stupid to think that it has a non-discriminatory policy now when it does and it’s stupid to think that the solution is less discrimination about who we let into the country (yay sure all you ISIS people, come on over) instead of more.
    Anyone who has studied humanity or reflected on human nature understands that religion is a very powerful motivating force and it is probably the strongest force which binds a people together as it can transcend and transform familial ties but also prevent familial ties from being established. And it is those family ties, the filial bonds of male-female parents with natural born children who bind two families together through blood which go to making a cohesive peaceful society.
    Religion underlies every value system in the world -yes even atheism ( which is a religious viewpoint) has spawned revolting value systems such as Marxism and utilitarianism. Also of import is the dominant religion / value system of a nation. An atheist growning up in a judeo Christian nation will have a decidedly different outlook to one in a Marxist atheist nation or one in a Buddhist nation and so on. We may not want public servants applying a religion test to immigrants (in fact they already do) but the dominant religion of an immigrant’s home country as well as their own religion should be considered as one indicator (risk factor) of how well an immigrant is likely to assimilate in Australia. ( Mind you with the left having totally destroyed marriage and the natural family we’re already on a back foot and if we turn a blind eye to the religion of immigrants we increase the risk of not just ghettoes but parallel societies, and as the Israelis will tell you, that becomes a cancer that is very hard to eradicate. Hezbollah and Lebanon anyone?).
    Finally I notice that all the open borders people live in the west and none of them ever make an effort to migrate to the middle east, Asia or anywhere else but the West.

  87. None

    The 50% figure is a straw man. It’s well known that a Muslim minority population only needs to reach 10% or so to become stridently uncompromising.

    5% becomes problematic; 10% becomes unmanageable. That is the nature of the religion. Fertility rates mean that they will get to 5% in Australia in the next few years. Demography is destiny people; Christianity talk over the Roman Empire because they’re out bred the Romans who couldn’t be asked getting married and having children anymore. You can thank all the lefties and feminazis for our present demographic woes.

  88. amortiser

    The final solution to my debt problem is to pay it off. Should such a suggestion be pilloried?

  89. None

    Oops I should not post long comments by VR on the phone because I can’t see the total posts and remove the duplication. Sorry

  90. Oh come on

    Leo G, the Final Solution entered the common vernacular long ago. What it means is very clear. Now, historically ignorant people may talk of a final solution in a literal sense – they are proposing a solution to a problem that is so effective that there will no longer be a problem.

    The trouble is that if you use the term ‘final solution’ in the context of race or ethnicity, you are inevitably going to conjure up horrific images from the 20th century of solutions to racial problems, effective on an industrial scale. Whether you realise it or not and regardless of your intent.

    Anning should claim ignorance, apologise for any offence given and rephrase.

  91. Oh come on

    The final solution to my debt problem is to pay it off. Should such a suggestion be pilloried?

    If you go out of your way to use that terminology, yes.

    I wouldn’t recommend a manager trying to implement a comprehensive reform of the corporate structure they’ve inherited describe the initial stages of their new model as ‘year zero’, either. That would be a bad idea.

  92. None

    Anning spent his early adulthood laying concrete pipes in far north Queensland so never got an education, so presumably doesn’t know what the Final Solution was. 

    I said it elsewhere most Australians alive today – educated or otherwise –
    wouldn’t recognise a reference to The Holocaust in the term “final solution.” I have elderly relatives still alive today who actually grew up under Nazi occupation plenty more who stories I know are now dead). They are well aware of deportations and exterminations – including a massacre of children- but they wouldn’t recognise the term “final solution “. That term is one that has been coined and propagated by post war historians and politicians. To also state the obvious: the Germans were not English speakers and neither were most Europeans.

  93. BrettW

    The Drum covered this and naturally brought on Ali Khadri and an Aussie African lady. African lady and ex NSW Minister Piccoli both actually said Sudanese under represented in Melbourne crime stats.

    Host introduced some clips, one of which showed Dutton talking about mistakes in 70’s Lebanese migration. As I understand it Immigration Dept at the time advised against it and the migrants from Lebanon at that time were not exactly the cream of the crop.

    Oh the irony of having Khadri commenting on the final solution comment. This is the guy on Q&A (a few years ago) who said Aussie people who had served in the Israeli army should be subject to the laws proposed for returned ISIS fighters. Zero credibility for me. He said he is from India originally. I guess Muslims from India must have a problem with Israel defending itself and those who wish to serve in her army.

  94. struth

    Final solution is not a term.
    It’s two words.
    That’s it.
    Let’s calm the hysterics ladies.
    “It was a gas” can be taken many ways.
    Something the MSM heard shaggy from Scooby Doo say and now think he’s a Nazi.

  95. MPH

    Another MSM cognitive science fail. No one would have even known what he said, except the panty wetting outrage brigade chose to put the image of mass murder of immigrants into everyone’s mind. It’s absolutely hilarious.

  96. None

    If you go out of your way to use that terminology, yes.

    Spoken like true thought police.

  97. Oh come on

    Or a CEO of a newly privatised, formerly state-owned enterprise speaking of a ‘cultural revolution’ in the offing.

  98. Perth Trader

    I watched ‘Blazing Saddles’ on TV over the weekend. I laughed loudly at the language used, the terms used and the total disregard of PC. In one scene it was shown that the value of a rail hand wagon was greater than a negro railworker , which was why the handwagon was saved from quicksand. I’m not sure what I’m eluding to here. Maybe I haven’t evolved to a caring , sensitive guy.

  99. Zyconoclast

    Beware of Nazi Words

    https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4227660&page=1

    Dozens of German words have for decades been taboo for native speakers because of the way those words were used by the Nazis.

    Now, an 800-page dictionary has been published to serve as a guide to avoiding linguistic traps into which Germans can easily fall.

    Terms such as “endloesung” (final solution) or “selektion” (selection) can quickly get the user into trouble, because the words acquired specific meanings and associations during the Third Reich.

  100. Whalehunt Fun

    I do not want to ban muslim immigration. I just want to muslim emigration. If you said it on your census form, then that is your legally enforcible demand to be deported. Simples. For every 1000 that come here, about 1050 want to kill me. 1050 because the desire to kill me is spread by those coming to those already here. I’m all for open borders. No court or person should be permitted to interfere with the expulsion of those who want to kill me.

  101. None

    That Nazi word dictionary Z is just another example of thought policing. Some Germans it seems, never learn.

  102. Makka

    The final solution to the immigration problem

    The full phraseology used. Substitute a few words and you have almost verbatim a speech given by AH.

    This has been a monumental cock up by Anning. It’s almost impossible to conceive that being so articulate and well researched in his arguments concerning migration , cultures, races and religions that this phrase and it’s emotional import could be in his speech by chance.

  103. Oh come on

    Beware of Nazi Words

    https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=4227660&page=1

    Dozens of German words have for decades been taboo for native speakers because of the way those words were used by the Nazis.

    Now, an 800-page dictionary has been published to serve as a guide to avoiding linguistic traps into which Germans can easily fall.

    Terms such as “endloesung” (final solution) or “selektion” (selection) can quickly get the user into trouble, because the words acquired specific meanings and associations during the Third Reich.

    Well, in the grand historical sweep, the Germans managed to get almost everything wrong. Music is an exception, but one of the few. They have a hell of a lot to atone for. The trouble is that they’ll approach atoning for their manifest fuckups with typically weird Germanic zeal and end up committing genocide – again.

  104. None

    So Makka is also a totalitarian . My my we should thank Anning for uncovering the fascists in our midst. How do you know that he didn’t mean the ultimate solution, or the best solution or the one that could possibly cut the gordian knot and take this issue off the table? That’s right you don’t, because you don’t live inside his head. You also don’t know if somebody else wrote his speech for him as usually is the case with a lot of these pollies.

  105. Makka

    So Makka is also a totalitarian .

    You’re a mouthy idiot. If you are serious about confronting the Uniparty about the ridiculous migration numbers shoved down our throats you don’t gift them and their media such highly effective bombs to take you out. Which is what he effectively did.

    Maybe you should grow up and think a little None. This is a hearts and minds game. Anning may have meant well but his execution was stupid and self defeating. He did his cause no good.

  106. Oh come on

    Makka is dead right. No sensible politician delivers a speech written for him without reading through it first.

    Yes, he could have said ultimate solution or best solution. Unfortunately he said final solution and worse – in the context of immigration, race relations etc. That is, at best, unforgivably clumsy.

  107. Makka

    You also don’t know if somebody else wrote his speech for him as usually is the case with a lot of these pollies.

    Actually, I know who wrote the speech. It’s still doesn’t absolve Anning. This is a massive own goal.

  108. Oh come on

    Again, Makka is right. There are a large bunch of people who don’t understand the significance of the term ‘final solution’. Let’s say this blows up into something of a Pauline Hanson maiden speech brouhaha. Let’s say the controversy is one-tenth of the size of Hanson’s explosion onto the Oz political scene. Still, many many people are going to learn about the significance of the ‘final solution’ term and either think Annings’s a genocidal loon, even though he might be making sense on the issue of Islamic immigration. Others who also make sound arguments on this issue will be tarred with the same brush.

  109. Makka

    Others who also make sound arguments on this issue will be tarred with the same brush.

    This is now certain, thanks to Anning. Are you keeping up, None?

  110. Ubique

    Open borders anda welfare state are incompatible. Do away with offshore processing and the only humane course left open to us is to send cruise ships, the RAN and Qantas to convey the illegal immigrants in their hundreds of thousands, if not millions, safely to Australia.

  111. Stimpson J. Cat

    Of all the comments in this thread the only one that confused, concerned and worried me was Stimpson use of the words, “rootless cosmopolitans” . It might be just me but it reminded me of wasted Friday nights when younger.

    I was actually directly quoting Alex Ryvchin, co-CEO of the Executive Council of Australian J$wry.
    Don’t be such a Nazi Nancy.

  112. None

    Maybe you should grow up and think a little None. This is a hearts and minds game. Anning may have meant well but his execution was stupid and self defeating. He did his cause no good.

    I can assure you that if anyone outside of the peanut gallery heard his speech, they would not have noticed final solution and probably found that much of his speech resonated with their thoughts.
    People don’t sit all day parsing politician’s words like the chattering class do. If chattering class subsequently convinced them that he did something wrong by saying final solution, then those people deserve the very worst of government that they can get.

  113. None

    This is now certain, thanks to Anning. Are you keeping up, None?

    Really? Certain? Are you tarring everyone on the Cat who agrees with most/all of what he said with the same brush, then? Counting yourself in there as well?

  114. Mark A

    Oh come on
    #2790292, posted on August 16, 2018 at 12:13 am

    Makka is dead right. No sensible politician delivers a speech written for him without reading through it first.

    Make that smart/ educated/politically aware politician.
    I think he is none of those.
    As someone else mentioned, to the vast, overwhelming majority of the great unwashed, it sounded the way he meant it.

    If not for the chattering classes it would’ve just be ignored, but you are right in that we do have a chattering class and they grab hold of any perceived misspeak and run with it.

  115. miltonf

    So what’s the take away from all this? One thing’s for sure- John Howard’s a Trumblite.

  116. A Lurker

    Open borders? In a welfare state? You must be mad.

    It is the problem with many intellectuals and LDP-libertarians – they have failed to cultivate wisdom, common sense, or even the simple understanding of real-life consequences.

    “Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it – yet those who do study history are doomed to stand by helplessly while everyone else repeats it.”

  117. None

    On the front page of the Paywallian:

    The speechwriter criticised for Fraser Anning’s first speech to parliament is said to be “fascinated with Nazi Germany”.

  118. iain russell

    Utter rot. We treat ‘asylum seekers’ amazingly well. I have involvement with many in Canberra as a volunteer. Country shopping, Centrelink seeking queue jumpers are merely restrained from strolling into the Centrelink office of their choosing. They are free to leave Manus and Nauru at any time and return to any of the countries they transmitted at any time. Or indeed return to their country of origin, where so many of them holiday after they have achieved PR status.

  119. areff

    I will not drive on a freeway. I will not ride in a jet. I will not watch a rocket launch at Cape Cananaral.

    No one is going to accuse me of being a Nazi sympathiser.

  120. None

    Also in the Paywallian is Claire Lehmann on the totalitarian takeover of all out institutions by the left. Another Drudge like juxtaposition.

  121. None

    Better not drive a VW either areff.
    If we are going to accuse a man of being a Nazi sympathizer on the basis of two words in a speech which was written for him then we really deserve to go down the toilet as a country.

  122. Texas Jack

    Davidson needs to go check out individual liberty and study the survival rate of out libertarians in caliphates. An open borders world run from Brussels or Mecca would be the most illiberal mousetrap ever conceived. Rampant consumerism will lead to people not noticing the steady encroachment of the state in every vestige of life.

  123. Herodotus

    Speaking of things that will “never happen” – my recollection of Sinc’s position on open borders is that he said open borders would be ok if there was no welfare. Right. There will always be welfare, it seems, so there should never be open borders.
    The hysteria over Anning’s speech infected commentators who are usually sensible, even those of a conservative flavour on Sky.
    The truth is that those who espouse the caliphate idea, or even those who just want sharia, are more like the Nazis. Islam is a political control system that is despicable, but such is the poor quality, the sham show, of political debate nowadays, we see this distraction squirrel running like crazy and smothering the important points about non-discriminatory immigration and refugee scams.

  124. JohnJJJ

    “As most Cats know I’m an open borders person” Good, you can join all the Christians of Egypt, Sudan , Somalia, Syria, all of North Africa, Lebanon… the Zoroastrians of Iran, the Hindus of the India continent, Indonesia…, the Buddhists of Afghanistan and Central Asia… They all had open borders. Most of them don’t exist anymore.

  125. struth

    Anning is Stupid?
    He just got himself more votes than any PC politician could hope for , using the media to help him.
    Looks like he’s learned from Trump unlike many cowering commenters here, some I’m quite surprised by.

  126. struth

    Please explain what you think a country is and why, if you are pro open borders, you shouldn’t be labelled an enemy of the state and a traitor.

  127. anonandon

    Social welfare or open borders. Take your pick.

  128. sabena

    When a large number of politicians pile in and criticise another politician,you know the first politician’s point has substance.Anning’s case is no different to that of Boris Johnson and his Burka comments.A poll of persons who read Anning’s statement in full are likely to agree with him.

  129. jjf

    The mutual wankfest we saw in parliament against Anning just proves that Australia is ready for a Trump style leader who will actually work to better Australia.

    My parents came here in the 50s from Italy and worked hard, learnt the language – compare that to the illegals, queue jumpers and “students” who come here now.

  130. None

    The reason why the politicians in the media are jumping on Anning is because they know he is reflecting what a lot of people think and it threatens their pants-wetting chai-sipping man-bunning anal-sex driven tax- hoovering existence. He’s like Pauline Hanson on steroids. Hmmm wait.

  131. Elle

    So what’s the take away from all this? 

    That a common statement used on the Cat is to “go f*ck yourself”.

    One could talk about the benefits of following through with this.

  132. Bruce

    @Roger: “The founder of Christianity renounced the use of the sword for religious purposes.”

    However, see Luke 22:36, King James version of Jesus words to the disciples at the Last Supper::

    “Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.”

    NOT a doctrine of terminal passivity, as it has become over the last century or so.

  133. struth

    The over reaction was laughable.
    It was also noticeable to millions that are politically apathetic but of normal IQ.
    It was a very big win by this bloke and again, the denouncing of him by those who truly fear the left and have learned nothing from Trump, appears again.

  134. Bruce

    Meanwhile, in Canada, the country which “road-tests” our laws before they are inflicted upon Australians:

    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/index.php/2018/08/15/42-kilos-of-mental-illness/#comments

    Oh, Canada; indeed!

  135. mh

    Bob Katter going to extraordinary lengths to win back the One Nation vote.

  136. Marko

    So only 49% want to ban Muslim immigration. Yes, agreed, that is a damning indictment of our national discourse and a failure of political leadership. Until this figure gets to at least 90% of the population seeking a ban, I think we must agree that our national discourse is proceeding along an entirely delusional path.
    When we see this figure consistently above 90% we can confidently say that we can survive as a coherent political entity, not just as a fractured nation of tribal interests.

  137. Boambee John

    Mark A at 0239

    “If not for the chattering classes it would’ve just be ignored, but you are right in that we do have a chattering class and they grab hold of any perceived misspeak and run with it.”

    As I said on the Open Thread, I think the reason for Tony Abbott’s ponderous speaking style is that he is always consciously attempting to avoid “trigger” words.

  138. struth

    So only 49% want to ban Muslim immigration.

    The figure, in truth, would be much larger and does not take into the fearful, and those who feel they can still benefit from virtue signalling while letting actual adults do the objecting.

  139. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    My parents came here in the 50s from Italy and worked hard, learnt the language – compare that to the illegals, queue jumpers and “students” who come here now.

    The Memsahibs parents emigrated from the Netherlands in the mid 1950’s. They decided that, since Australia was an English speaking country, and they had decided to come here, henceforth, the family would only ever speak English, even within the four walls of their own home. Compare that to the illegals and queue jumpers who come here now.

  140. JohnA

    struth #2790420, posted on August 16, 2018, at 8:21 am

    The over-reaction was laughable.
    It was also noticeable to millions that are politically apathetic but of normal IQ.

    Just to remind Cats that the title above includes the word “hypocrisy”.

    Everyone in the media seems to have gone ballistic over the words as if they were concerned for the fate of J.wish people and the preservation of their ethnicity.

    That seems to contradict the MSM view (held also by the majority of wimpish pollies) that the cause of all the Middle East troubles is the existence of the nation of Israel.

    I suggest that the Australian voters who are now purportedly supportive of Fraser Anning and the tenor of his speech, have once again seen through the duplicity and hypocrisy of the chattering classes.

  141. struth

    If they ran with “final solution” it means they have nothing.

  142. .

    None
    #2790403, posted on August 16, 2018 at 8:06 am

    The reason why the politicians in the media are jumping on Anning is because they know he is reflecting what a lot of people think and it threatens their pants-wetting chai-sipping man-bunning anal-sex driven tax- hoovering existence. He’s like Pauline Hanson on steroids. Hmmm wait.

    Yes. “I disavow myself of him”, now you’re getting it.

  143. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    If they ran with “final solution” it means they have nothing.

    Fair comment.

  144. struth

    Yes. “I disavow myself of him”, now you’re getting it.

    Who’s “getting it”?
    None gets it a lot more than you do when it comes to borders and immigration.

  145. Andyd

    @Roger: Mathew 10:34 “Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword.”

  146. mh

    Fraser Anning (who?) used the words “final” and “solution” in the same sentence in Parliament.

    Nearly there, Sinclair. How about saying that an MP’s maiden speech contained the exact phrase “the final solution to the immigration problem”.

  147. Ellen of Tasmania

    I don’t see it happening. In any event, so what? I’m of the view that rampant consumerism will resolve most of the world’s problems – including excessive religious fervour.

    It seems to me that ‘rampant consumerism’ triggers the envy-ridden, religious fervour of the left/collectivists/communists to an enormous extent.

    Social welfare or open borders. Take your pick.

    And pick your order. Chicken or egg?

  148. On indisputable fact. If we had no Muslims in Australia we would not have had one terrorist attack or incident in ten last 10 years! Not one! Sort of speaks for itself doesn’t it? Gee, perhaps Fraser Anning is right?

  149. Ellen of Tasmania

    The final solution to the immigration problem is, of course, a popular vote.

    Sorry – but unless you are killing people (in which case, at least for them, it is final) – I just can’t see that a popular vote is final. Voters have been known to change their minds.

  150. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Here’s a list of the politicians who shook hands / hugged / kissed Fraser Anning after his speech calling for an end to Muslim immigration.

    Minister Mathias Cormann
    Minister Bridget McKenzie
    Minister Nigel Scullion
    Minister Conchetta Fierravanti-Wells
    Minister Matt Canavan
    Assistant minister James McGrath
    Assistant minister Anne Ruston
    Steve Martin
    Amanda Stoker
    Jonathan Duniam
    James Paterson
    Dean Smith
    David Bushby
    Wacka Williams
    Barry O’Sullivan
    Cory Bernardi
    Derryn Hinch
    David Leyonhjelm
    One Nation’s Peter Georgiou
    Centre Alliance’s Stirling Griff & Rex Patrick

    No Labor/Greens senators congratulated him.

    From Michael Smith news.

  151. mh

    Brexit was a popular vote. Then the elites decided that it would not be the solution.

  152. .

    Therein lies the problem. Parliament won’t give you a plebiscite anyway and they are not bound to follow it.

    If you were in a position to demand a plebiscite…Parliament would have given it to you anyway.

  153. gbees

    Well he may have used the phrase ‘final solution’ but it certainly wasn’t a reference to the Nazi solution. In fact given Muslims supported Hitler in WWII one could argue that given Fraser’s move to reduce or ban Muslim immigration that he is in fact anti-Nazi. But I suspect the usual outrage suspects wouldn’t see the irony in that.

  154. Eddystone

    Andrew Bolt has made the obvious point that warming alarmists have been throwing around the term “denier” for a decade or more now, without having the pollies getting all tearful about it.

  155. Old School Conservative

    But I suspect the usual outrage suspects wouldn’t see the irony in that.

    gbees, your suspicions are well founded:

    Richard Mcgilvray, a legal and legislative adviser to Senator Anning, posted on his LinkedIn account he resigned “effective immediately” after the speech.

    “I do not condone Senator Anning’s speech. His reference to ‘the Final Solution’ was not something I had seen, heard of, or discussed prior to his remarks last night and as a consequence, within hours of Senator Anning’s speech, I resigned my position effective immediately,”
    Note the deliberate and misleading capital F capital S to further destabilise Anning.

  156. Habib

    I think Senator Anning wrong on the merits of wanting to ban immigration on ethnic and religious grounds.

    How about on obnoxious, surly, ignorant arsehole grounds? Criminal oxygen thief grounds? Welfare absorption grounds? Enemy combatant grounds?

  157. Bored

    A request or two. Can Stimpson Cat please explain why he uses $ signs when he spells the word Jew? And: would those who seem to be paranoid about Muslim immigration please board the next flight to Australia’s nearest neighbour and tell its 250 million Muslims that they should move out of the neighbourhood?

    [To prevent Bird-strike the word “Jew” is on auto-moderation. Stim Cat is avoiding auto-moderation by substitution. Sinc]

  158. Habib

    Agree. Deport all hipsters.

  159. Boambee John

    Eddystone
    #2790521, posted on August 16, 2018 at 10:32 am
    Andrew Bolt has made the obvious point that warming alarmists have been throwing around the term “denier” for a decade or more now, without having the pollies getting all tearful about it.

    You just don’t understand. It is quite OK for the fascist left to use Holocaust references to silence their opponents. It is, however, absolutely haram for non-leftists to say or do anything that slows the “progress” of the fascist left.

    //sarc, in case it is really necessary.

  160. James (Aus.)

    Will Sinclair be having an Open Door policy, too? Any bedrooms, kitchen and laundry space to be fully utilised, and of course food etc to be provided for any number of years. Extra rooms to be built by Sinc when their rellies arrive. Of course, if Sinc objects because he pays taxes, absolve him of any future targeted tax increases but insist he keeps providing the above services.
    Anyway, his drinks bill is likely to be small. And his own imbibing will need be covert. Win win.

    It’s only fair.

  161. Elle

    Sinc, if I may ask. What is the history behind why using the full word J*w or J*wish goes into moderation? Was someone naughty? Are there anti-semites among us?

    Shalom 😁
    ✡🕎

    [Some words and phrases go into auto-moderation to deter Bird-strike. Ask about it on the open thread. But yes – there are anti-semites amongst us. Sinc]

  162. Elle

    Oh. That was the wrong smiley face. Try this one 😊

  163. struth

    It is quite OK for the fascist left to use Holocaust references to silence their opponents.

    No it isn’t.

    The fascist left were the ones that actually did the killing.
    The holocaust is theirs and they own it.
    It is not OK for them to use it to silence their critics.
    Hitler was a socialist …National Socialist Workers Party, or NAZIs who were allied to Fascist Italy.

    The Holocaust was their doing.
    All of it.

  164. struth

    Will Sinclair be having an Open Door policy, too?

    Think of Sinclair as a sort of Bolta.

    Both left wing, not real patriotic to Australia, but unable to swallow all the left’s bullshit without fighting back sometimes.
    And both captured and screaming from the left wing bubble their workplaces mostly are.
    Very hard to keep an even keel in that environment.

  165. Ellen of Tasmania

    No it isn’t.

    The trouble with the ‘Emperor’s New Clothes’ story is that when the little boy points out said Emperor’s nakedness, everyone believe’s the truth.

    Nowadays, they all turn on him and accuse him of being naked, wretched and blind.

    Theodore Dalrymple:

    “In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

  166. UNLIKE MOST OF YOU I came here from a Muslim country.
    UNLIKE MOST OF YOU I lived and worked among Muslim immigrants.
    UNLIKE MOST OF YOU I’ve been in large gatherings where I listened to the opinions and attitudes of Muslim immigrants.
    UNLIKE MOST OF YOU I have experienced life in majority Muslim communities.

    So my advice to you, based on first hand experience and supported by observing what’s happening elsewhere is this. Say no to mass Muslim immigration and say no to chain migration of Muslims.
    If you can’t curb your virtue signalling urge, then your children (especially your girls) will pay a heavy price. The heaviest price will be the loss of freedoms. Freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of expression.
    If you can’t see that we’ve already lost some of those freedoms, then you’re in denial and in full virtue signalling mode.
    I’d suggest you test yourself out. Go to an area heavily concentrated with Muslims, and display some good old fashioned free speech and free expression. You won’t because you know what the consequences will be. Cowards.

    You are fvcking up this wonderful country. There aren’t that many of them in this World.

  167. .

    struth
    #2790600, posted on August 16, 2018 at 12:20 pm

    Will Sinclair be having an Open Door policy, too?

    Think of Sinclair as a sort of Bolta.

    Both left wing, not real patriotic to Australia, but unable to swallow all the left’s bullshit without fighting back sometimes.
    And both captured and screaming from the left wing bubble their workplaces mostly are.
    Very hard to keep an even keel in that environment.

    Jesus christ you’re a lunatic struth. First the law quackery, now this.

  168. Mother Lode

    From what I can see, the preferred settings for Sinkers and such is not so far from what we had in the past, before the growth of the welfare state.

    People turning up knew they had to make it on their own and had to ‘buy into’ Australia. Without the government there to pour money into your pockets (no questions asked) you had to reach out, cooperate, and get along with other people.

    People put a value on living here before they even arrived because it was going to cost them no small effort to succeed.

    Your welfare spongers would not see the appeal without the welfare.

    Where I differ perhaps is that I still think culture matters. The notion of freedom we have is far broader than most other societies, notions of justice, attitude toward law and so on are born of a culture.

    I suppose what jars most is that, given the preferred libertarian ideal is for a twinship of open borders without the welfare state, they seem content to accept just the open border bit in the meantime. I would have thought the paring back of welfare would be the more important of the two as it would benefit Australia with or without open borders.

    Now I will duck.

  169. Ellen of Tasmania

    In today’s world, when the little boy points out the obvious, the police will be on him in a flash (to ‘question’ him), it will be all over the MSM, with tireless commentary on his ‘evil blindness’ and hyperbolic outrage and hate poured upon him in social media. The pollies will fall in line – at the very least.

    His parents will be hauled over the coals, and might lose their jobs or business.

    Thus we are trained. One toe, even a hairs-breadth over the PC line, and this could be your fate, too. More and more people decide that the Emperor’s suit is gorgeous and they’re on ‘the right side of history’ for believing it.

  170. Habib

    Open borders (with some limitations such as quarantine/security risk etc) needs to be the last action, total dismantlement of welfare, medicare, the ABC and every other socialist affectation the first. I’d say we’d initially see net emigration, and a bloody good thing too.

  171. flyingduk

    Open borders are a libertarian ideal, but one that conflicts with another libertarian ideal, that of the ‘non aggression principle’. Given the high dependency rates of many of our immigrants, it is necessary that the state agresses against its existing citizens by confiscating taxes from them, under threat of violence, to support the immigrants. The only solution to this dilemma is to deny welfare to non citzens (and ideally, to all citizens too). Until that happens, open borders are fundamentally anti-libertarian, and as such should be opposed by this forum.

  172. Rossini

    Dave of Reedy Creek, Qld
    #2790226, posted on August 15, 2018 at 10:55 pm
    +1

  173. Rossini

    Marcus
    #2790236, posted on August 15, 2018 at 11:04 pm
    Well marcus I am ignorant as far as you are concerned……….but then I guess there are many more like me
    who did not know the ramifications of using the expression “final solution” for sh1t sake

  174. flyingduk

    Islam has been pretty constant for 1400 years – it cannot and will not change.
    It is an supremacist ideology that will not stop until it is destroyed or its host is assimilated and subsequently destroyed.

    I have worked in a number of islamic countries and can confirm you are right. This is particularly true in low IQ countries like most of Africa, worse indeed than the middle east. Those few relatively enlightened islamic countries are the exceptions and can be expected to revert to type and worsen, not improve.

  175. Confused Old Misfit

    Libertarianism will not work unless everyone is a libertarian.

  176. .

    More shilling for the idea that we should give up on liberty.

    Anning made some good points, and in response, conservative people I like and respect come up with this garbage – along with voting for dead dictators around the globe.

    This blog gets worse and worse.

    You’ve all gone mad.

  177. stackja

    flyingduk
    #2790702, posted on August 16, 2018 at 2:21 pm
    and can be expected revert to type and worsen, not improve.

    Turkey.

  178. stackja

    liberty? Of open border?

  179. Stimpson J. Cat

    A request or two. Can Stimpson Cat please explain why he uses $ signs when he spells the word Jew?

    I’m glad you asked, Bored.
    Certain letters are auto moderated or banned at Catallaxy when used in conjunction with other letters.
    My final solution to this problem was to substitute a symbol for any letters that cause this issue.
    Hope that clears things up!

  180. Stimpson J. Cat

    A request or two. Can Stimpson Cat please explain why he uses $ signs when he spells the word J$w?

    I’m glad you asked, Bored.
    Certain letters are auto moderated or banned at Catallaxy when used in conjunction with other letters.
    My final solution to this problem was to substitute a symbol for any letters that cause this issue.
    Hope that clears things up!

  181. Infidel Tiger 2.0 (Premium Content Subscribers Only)

    Open Borders loons rejoice:

    Pew Research Center

    Verified account

    @pewresearch
    Follow Follow @pewresearch
    More
    Share of people in each country who would live in another nation if circumstances permitted:
    🇬🇭 Ghana: 75%
    🇳🇬 Nigeria: 74%
    🇰🇪 Kenya: 54%
    🇿🇦 South Africa: 51%
    🇸🇳 Senegal: 46%
    🇹🇿 Tanzania: 43%
    https://pewrsr.ch/2pw36zs

    https://twitter.com/Steve_Sailer/status/1029628007164469248

  182. Mother Lode

    I am not saying a culture should be imposed in any way.

    To the contrary I think that culture will be another variable when people self-select to move to one place or another.

  183. testpattern

    Anning used the language he’s familiar with using while he promotes the neo nazi white genocide conspiracy theory for political gain. He knows the terminology of genocide and white supremacy very well and knew exactly what he was saying. His speeches are widely circulated on South African Boer white supremacist sites. Among his designated axis of evil countries is Angola. He’s drinkin’ the racist koolaid and lovin’ it.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_genocide_conspiracy_theory

  184. Mak Siccar

    Prof Sinc is trolling all of his devoted followers.

  185. Mak Siccar

    Baa Humbug
    #2790633, posted on August 16, 2018 at 12:57 pm

    +1000

  186. Oh come on

    No need to murder all the whites but let’s make a start by wiping out Pestes.

  187. Elizabeth (Lizzie) Beare

    So you can’t have a solution to any social problem now it seems?

    He could have said the ‘best’ solution, or the ‘real’ solution, or the ‘most effective’ solution, or the ‘eventual’ solution and that is how people should read the sentence, not by introducing red herrings from another set of linguistic meanings where they are not implied.

    Looking at this from the distance of the Arctic Circle, the solution is obvious.
    Tell these critiquing fools to shut up and grow up.
    Australia is becoming a laughing stock because of nonsense like this.
    Hypersensitivity in American snowflake universities is one idiotic contagion currently being felt in Australia, but such hypersensitivity in the Australian Parliament is quite another.

  188. None

    Hypersensitivity in American snowflake universities is one idiotic contagion currently being felt in Australia, but such hypersensitivity in the Australian Parliament is quite another.

    Oh I don’t think the hyperventilators actually care about anything much Lizzie except scoring a political point (the pompous overdone virtue signalling) and eliminating Anning’s appeal (even if they just guaranteed his reelection).

  189. None

    So the Fraser Anning speech writer used to work for Malcolm Roberts…and David Leyonhjelm .
    Meanwhile back at the Guardian:

    David Leyonhjelm confirmed that Howard also worked for him for “a few months during sitting periods” before working for Anning.

    He told Guardian Australia that Howard “isn’t a r*cist as far as I know” but “loves winding up the professional outrage industry even more than I do”.

    “Fraser [Anning] told me Richard [Howard] helped with the speech but I don’t know how much.”

    Fetch the smelling salts: soy boy McGilvray -a non entity if I ever saw one, but basically some namby adviser to Anning – quits. The Unity of Lemmings and the Parliament of Arseclowns.

    {I omitted the links because it keeps going to moderation}

  190. W Hogg

    As most Cats know I’m an open borders person.

    Nothing better illustrates the harm academia does.

    Then follows a silly hypothesis about consumerism defusing radicalism. bin Laden himself had a net worth of $200m, in a family with billions. Even richer and more consumerist are the Saudi and Qatari royal families who do or did sponsor much of the workd’s Islamic terrorism.

    Go to the Laq’embah mosque some time. Check out all the expensive cars that turn up.

  191. Habib

    It sure as hell isn’t desert goat pilots funding IS and the plethora of other trouble-making head-loppers roaming loose, or the madrassas that produce them. The UAE and Saudi are the wealthiest places on the planet, with every possible gaudy gee-gaw a tasteless sand goblin could desire, yet they source a good old whack of explodeys. If they didn’t have the oil dinars they’d be in a mud hut pulling a train on a ruminant, and not causing trouble elsewhere.

  192. AussieMaga

    >Communal interest is the basis of all morality

    >> No. Two wolves voting to eat a sheep is moral, is it?

    >not individualism like libertards like to pretend

    >>Okay fuckwit. We decide to outlaw you. You have NO rights and we can legally treat you like a punching bag, gun range target, pin cushion, love doll or ashtray.

    Do you love da morality yet?

    Triggered!

    “Two wolves voting to eat a sheep is moral” – yes. Wolves eat to survive, are you saying group survival is immoral? What a really bad analogy!

    What communal interest is advanced by you treating someone so poorly?

    Please think before you reply to me again, Libertard.

Comments are closed.