[an error occurred while processing this directive]
About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 3:12pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Post 1

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 3:21pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I love it when a political leader shows a rational backbone.



Post 2

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 4:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for posting this PC. Superb news. Howard has just gone way up in my estimation.



Post 3

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 6:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks for posting this, Peter. If only NZ politicians were so staunch! You've got to hand it to the Australians - they've never really surrendered to the PC brigade.



Post 4

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 7:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Congratulations, Australia! I'm jealous.



Post 5

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 7:30pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bravo! Excellent post, he's an ugly little man but at least he has balls



Post 6

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 8:06pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Perhaps we can import some Auzzie moral clarity to this side of the Pacific.



Post 7

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 8:33pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
That's one of the greatest things I've ever seen! Clear. Reasonable. Beautiful. Now let's see if they mean it.



Post 8

Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - 8:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
May Australia's stance be the start of a trend in the world.

Michael




Post 9

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 4:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I'm enjoying the moral clarity, although I'm not so excited by it for 2 reasons:

1. It doesn't show a rational backbone, just one particular policy that we agree with.
2. His argument is that if someone wants Sharia law, they should go to another country. This bears too much resemblance to the argument that if we don't like uncontrolled parliamentary democracy then we should leave the country.

My impression of Australian politics is that the remark is motivated by parochial nationalism rather than rationality.




Post 10

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 4:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, my beloved Dubya is still spewing the "Religion of Peace" nonsense and it seems that the entire populace is kowtowing to CAIR.

Angry





Post 11

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 4:52amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Summer, I had to do a Google search on CAIR to get this link:

http://www.cair-net.org/

Ah, so it is the Council on American-Islamic Relations.  Gotcha!

My, their Web site makes their faith look so ... so ... nice.




Post 12

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 5:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

My, their Web site makes their faith look so ... so ... nice.

Yeah, until something goes *boom*, killing thousands of innocent folks.  I used to work for Cantor Fitzgerald at One World Trade.  I wonder what my former co-workers -- the ones who perished on 9/11/01 -- would have to say about Islam.

I really shouldn't discuss this... I'm still just a tad bitter.




Post 13

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 5:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Let's hear it for the convicts. Here's my favourite bit:
Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should “clear off”. “Basically, people who don’t want to be Australians, and they don’t want to live by Australian values and understand them, well then they can basically clear off,” he said.
 Right that's it - I am moving to Sydney by week's end!




Post 14

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 6:12amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Excellent! It does show backbone, because in todays climate it is a hell of a non pc thing to say.



Post 15

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 6:59amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Summer & Luke, Robert Bidinotto has a link to Daniel Pipes' excellent fisking of CAIR.  Says RB, "At best, CAIR is the biggest, best-organized group of excuse-makers and apologists for Islam's Wahhabi wing in America. At worst, some of its representatives are far more sinister and unsavory than that. See for yourself: the special report by Pipes and Chadha is the most comprehensive effort yet to unveil these characters and their machinations."

You can find the link here:
http://bidinotto.journalspace.com/?entryid=289

:-)




Post 16

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 7:09amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Peter,

Excellent article.  And some of the comments were spot-on as well (except for the person who called for reinstatement of the draft -- he started out well, but fell flat on that point).

Thanks!




Post 17

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 8:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
When I read that article, I thought, "This is unambiguously good. Not even the anti-war brigade could rain on this parade." But somehow Fraser you managed to pick holes in it!
1. It doesn't show a rational backbone, just one particular policy that we agree with.
2. His argument is that if someone wants Sharia law, they should go to another country. This bears too much resemblance to the argument that if we don't like uncontrolled parliamentary democracy then we should leave the country.

My impression of Australian politics is that the remark is motivated by parochial nationalism rather than rationality.
It isn't "just" one particular policy. It is one particular policy that deals with the most important issue facing the world today. And the principle of the particular policy is utterly rational.

In your point (2), you seem to be suggesting that we should reject a particular method applied to a just cause because that method might one day be applied to an unjust cause.  Sounds like a package deal to me.  I take it to mean that you don't agree with the method in the first place, in which case your point (2) contradicts point (1).  Not meaning to point score or anything, but you should just say so if you don't agree with the policy / principle / method / whatever.

Then your last point makes a generalisation against Australian politics rather than dealing with the specific remark that was made. I thought generalisations would be exactly the kind of thing you of all people would be opposed to...? ;-)

Tim






Post 18

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 1:57pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
     Now, if only Bush said/(says, hopefully, yet?) something like this, or, what Blair is saying, my estimation of his domestic-yuckiness might raise back up towards 0...decimally, to be sure, but...

LLAP
J:D




Post 19

Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - 3:40pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Wanna know something interesting?

Countries with hard-line Muslim governments generally say the same thing to all those with different ideologies (especially foreigners) - except more forcibly.

Michael




Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page
[an error occurred while processing this directive]


User ID Password or create a free account.