Tag: Islamophobia

Banning Islam is not the answer but………….

There is a lot of talk at the moment about the thought of banning Islam in Australia. Queensland Senator, and Leader of One Nation, Pauline Hanson has introduced this as part of her policy. Senator Hanson has recognised that before banning Islam, constitutional constraints hold this policy back. 

Section 116 of the Australian Constitution states:

116 Commonwealth not to legislate in respect of religion

The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise of any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonweath

One Nation has called for a Royal Commission into Islam to see whether or not it is a religion or a political ideology. By determining whether it is a political ideology or a religion, Senator Hanson believes this will solve the constitutional constraint to ban Islam.

The concern I have with such Royal Commission is that any religion that has a vast history such as Islam will always be determined as a religion not a political ideology. All religions have a certain degree of political ideology and that is due to it’s past existance. For example you only have to look at the Roman Empire to see that it had a catholic ideology behind it’s governance. Therefore having a Royal Commision into Islam would be a waste of time, effort and taxpayers money. 

One Nation could adopt a policy whereby that they will push to have a referendum to ammend section 116 of the Australian Constitution. This referendum would also cost taxpayers a lot of money and with a Double Majority rule for constitutional change, could mean that such move could be lost. Not many referendums are successful. On the otherhand One Nation will be giving the people a say on the matter.

The other areas where One Nation could focus their attention is to adopt a discriminatory immigration policy. One Nation has already upset the apple cart by saying that they want to ban Islam – as I pointed out this is hard to do – so by having a discriminatory immigration policy whereby there is a halt of immigration on those from Islamic Arab Nations, will slow down the rise of Islam in Australia and will not hinder One Nation’s political capital.

Many on the left, centre and even the right will say that we can’t have a discriminatory immigration program as it will take us back to the White Australia Policy – the fact is Australia already has a discriminatory immigration policy, we discriminate on the basis of health and occupation therefore this argument is flawed. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation as I see it right now is the only hope for Australia to follow in Trumps lead, they just need to clean up their policies first. 

Myth Busters on Pauline Hanson

Well she did it. She told the rabble back in 1998 that she will be back, and she is, this time bigger than ever. Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party have secured FOUR senate seats. This is impressive considering two years ago they were a distant memory plagued with infighting and internal abyss.

Given that she is back with a vengeance, the left and her opponents on the right continue to spread several myths about her despite many media commentators such as Andrew Bolt, Rowan Dean, Paul Murray, Miranda Devine and others share Pauline’s beliefs on certain issues. Lets explore these myths about Pauline Hanson.

  • Pauline Hanson hates Asians.

“We are in danger of being swamped by Asians….”

A famous quote which lead the racism label on Pauline Hanson. The only critical thing here that I can say is she used poor choice of words on the matter. The fact is we are in danger of being swamped, not by Asians but by the Chinese. RACIST!! BIGOT!! I hear people shout. Well let us explore more.

We have seen already the impact Chinese buyers have on the housing market, and despite that some economists are saying it’s slowing, many Australians have been pushed out of the Market. The dream of buying your own home no longer exists.

The other issue is Chinese companies, which have links with China’s Communist Party are buying up Prime Agricultural Land as well as buying infrastructure such as Ausgrid. Even Scott Morrison, the Federal Treasurer has concerns about this and blocked it.

To rub salt into the wound, we have heard allegations that links to Chinese Communist Party have been donating money to the Liberal Party and the Australian Labor Party. These three issues that I have mentioned should send alarm bells to the Australian people, now when Pauline Hanson said we are in danger of being swamped by Asians, what more proof do we need? Do we really want Australia to be a communist nation? Controlled by the Chinese elite? This myth that Pauline Hanson hates Asians is simplistic and all it does it stifles debate on serious issues that affect Australia. MYTH BUSTED.

  • Pauline Hanson hates Aboriginals.

This comes from Hanson’s maiden speech where she called to abolish ATSIC and to reform the welfare system so that everyone is treated equally.

Well from memory, the Liberals abolished ATSIC because of the corrupt nature it was spewing from its offices. This is exactly what Hanson was talking about in her maiden speech in 1996.

Reforming the welfare system to ensure that everyone regardless of race, colour or creed does not make Hanson hate Aboriginal people. Australia is in debt, and the debt is rising. Unemployment is also rising. Therefore by abolishing some welfare payments and rolling them into one whereby no one is treated any different actually serves the Aboriginal community with more respect. Many Aboriginal leaders have come out and have said exactly what Hanson has been saying, such as former Labor National President Warren Mundine. Again this myth that Hanson hates aboriginal people is wrong and ignores the real issue within indigenous communities. MYTH BUSTED.

  • Pauline Hanson is Islamophobic

With the ever-increasing threat of Islamic Extremism within Western Civilisation, Pauline Hanson has called for the following:

  • Royal Commission into Islam
  • No More Islamic Migration
  • No More Mosques
  • CCTV In Mosques

The fact is any attack on citizens whereby the suspect shouts “Allah Akbar” has everything to do with religion and nothing to do with mental health.

Our political leaders are soft on this issue. Former Prime Minister, Tony Abbott did touch on the issue and was tackling it, however extreme left winger – I say extreme because the Liberal Party is suppose to be a right wing party – Malcolm Turnbull has tip toed around the issue of Islamic Extremism.

Pauline Hanson’s approach may seem extreme, however in extreme circumstance, extreme measures need to be implement rather than hash tags, feel good slogans and government funded community programs.

Firstly I’m going to discuss the Royal Commission issue. Hanson does need to define the terms of reference on this, because yes it is a religion and yes has some political ideology. All religions at some point have political leanings. We can see this with the Christian Democratic Party and Family First Party.

Having the terms of reference, which investigates all aspects of the religion, is warranted such as Halal Certification, Sharia Law practices within our community, and potential terror links attached to certain mosques. Calling for this does not make one islamophobic, the term should be ‘Islamoaware’.

The other issue stopping Islamic migration has caused howling from the left saying that we do not want a discriminatory migration program. Well in actual fact we already have a discriminatory immigration policy. We discriminate on the basis of health and occupation, therefore why can’t we discriminate on the basis of religion and culture? As one former Prime Minister said.

“We decide who comes into this country and the circumstance they come…”

We ought to have a policy whereby the culture has greater chance of assimilating to the host culture; otherwise we will create ghettos of hostility like Europe is currently experiencing.

The issue with Hanson’s other policies such as calling for a halt of mosques and CCTV is that is it all practical? This is a debate for another time.

Does all this make Hanson islamophobic? It depends on the definition of Islamophobia. The left argue that Islamophobia is hatred towards Islam, but when you break down the words, phobia means scared. Therefore is she scared of Islam? Well I’m not going to answer on Hanson’s behalf but if she says yes, then she has every right to be scared of Islam. So the myth of is Hanson Islamophobic? Well that is dependent on the definition of Islamophobia but using the lefts definition that she hates Muslims – MYTH BUSTED.

  • Hanson has no economic credibility.

As a Conservative Libertarian, I do sometimes find myself at odds with Hanson and One Nation’s economic platform. To say however that Hanson has no economic credibility is and should be, insulting to small business owners in Australia. Prior to 1996 Pauline Hanson was a small business owner, the infamous fish and chip shop. To own a small business and to employ staff must show that one has some economic credibility.

If you go to Pauline Hanson’s Facebook page and see the people who have liked her posts, and you explore their profiles many are either self-employed or a manager or managing directors of companies. This tells me that Hanson must have some credibility otherwise these people would not go near Hanson.
Hanson might not have the same view as most economists, but she does hold particular views that in the past have brought nations out from the abyss. This myth is BUSTED.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party has a long way to go in terms of policy development especially when there are upcoming State Elections looming. One Nation as a political force does need to revise their policies and to educate the public what they do stand for, because otherwise the left and Hanson’s opponents will continue to spew out false myths which will unfortunately stifle debate on issues that need to be discussed.
In saying that, the party has just begun and I say to Pauline Hanson, Congratulations and look forward to seeing One Nation grow to be a major player in Australian Politics.

MPs have a right to be critical of Islam!

I am somewhat perplexed as to why ASIO’s chief Duncan Lewis decided that he must involve himself in political matters by calling up Liberal MPs telling them they must moderate their language over Islam. His argument is that it puts our national safety at risk. This improper involvement of senior bureaucrats raises the question how effective is ASIO at keeping Australia safe and also does flag concerns as to the real reason why Lewis called up concerned Liberal MPs.

Members of Parliament are elected representatives of the people who vote for them. As a secular nation we must be able to have the ability to question religions and be critical where necessary. For instance, society as a whole has been, and should be, critical of some aspects of christianity especially some denominations which have hidden concerns of paedophilia. Likewise, society should question Islam and the role it plays in society when it comes to homosexuality, women’s rights and the extreme element of terrorism.
Politicians such as Tony Abbott, Craig Kelly, Andrew Nikolic and other Liberal MPs have every right to question Islam and to encourage Muslims to consider opening up their religion for reform, after all these MPs are elected representatives and must represent the views of the electorate.

It is interesting to note that Lewis has just admitted that using strong language to critise Islam will put our national security at risk. Does this mean a terror attack? Either way, ASIO is equipped legislatively and has the funding to intercept potential attacks. To suggest that strong language increases a risk of an attack is foolish and discredits the hard work ASIO does to keep us safe.

This notion then raises the question, why did Lewis put ASIO’s own credibility at risk by calling up Liberal MPs? The answer is we will never know, however it would not be surprising if either the Prime Minister or someone within his office put Lewis up to it. As we all know Malcolm Turnbull is a progressive politician and as the Liberals hold seats such as Reid for the first time, upsetting the Muslim community would detrimental for the Liberals.

 

 

Reclaim Common Sense

Australia is suppose to be a democracy. We are suppose to value and nurture the fundamentals of free speech. Unfortunately what we have seen this weekend (18th and 19th July 2015) is nothing much but a disgrace. Disgrace by all parties involved – in particular the Melbourne rally.

Extreme left wing groups like Socialist Alliance, Socialist alternative and the Australian Greens have come out in force and used violence against ordinary Australians voicing their concerns about the rise of extreme Islam. The rise of extreme Islam is real; we have seen this in Europe, and here on our land. Given this Australian’s should be concerned and they should be able to voice their opinions free from violence.

Reclaim Australia however isn’t all innocent in the violence on the weekend. The problem with groups like Reclaim Australia, they attract far right Neo-Nazi sympathisers, just like socialist alliance and the Greens attract far left Trotsky communist loving hippies. Often we see neo Nazi’s join these groups to be able to act in a thuggerish behaviour.

Both sides must know that the media will only report on the hype of violence and not on the undertones in which they stand for. Interestingly however the extreme left were the perpetrators of the violence yet the media painted Reclaim Australia as the troublemakers.

If Reclaim Australia want to be taken seriously they need to rid the extremist element of their organisation and start a grassroots campaign to outline what they really stand for, otherwise the media and the extreme left will just continue to discredit them.

UK LABOUR SUPPORTS SEGREGATION OF WOMEN, WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS?

The Left often argues that they support women’s rights and tend to push the feminist agenda. Segregation of men and women definitely goes against feministic ideals. In the United Kingdom, The UK Labour Party have been found at a Party gathering at a Muslim Community Centre, segregating men and women. Men on one side, women on the other. The question I’d like to know is, why? And where are the feminists??

The UK Labour Party have championed open immigration as part of their platform for winning elections post the Thatcher-era in efforts to keep the Tories out of power. They have admitted that they wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural thus in return those from ethnic backgrounds would likely to vote for Labour over the Conservatives.

In Australia for instance, electorates that have high number of immigrants from the Middle East such as Auburn, Bankstown and Lakemba all favour the Labor Party over the conservative Liberal Party.

Ed Milliband, UK Labour Leader has recently declared that if he becomes Prime Minister he will make Islamophobia illegal, despite tough legislation already in place for discrimination.

One can only assume the reason for the segregation is that the UK Labour Party is pandering to the Islamic vote. If the UK Labour Party wants to do this, then so be it, but they should not give themselves self-praise for tackling sexism. The feminist movement also needs to come out and attack the UK Labour Party and distance themselves from Ed Milliband.

If the UK Labour Party wins Government on 7th May 2015 and Ed Milliband becomes Prime Minister, what will the UK become? Will segregation be the norm? Will women lose their rights? They aren’t painting a pretty picture.