Fred Nile: racist (part three)

I thought I could have a reasoned debate with Erik, but his latest post's first argument quotes me out of context and ignores the entire point. Thus, not much point continuing as it will just descend into a "you are", "no you are" slanging match. A shame, as there are important issues here.

In other, related, news, it emerges that Fred Nile has refused to preference Egyptian and Lebanese Christian candidates due to their middle eastern backgrounds, names and skin. This is despite his party preferencing Liberals elsewhere.

He's said he wants to help middle eastern Christians emigrate, but then can't pick them from their Muslim counterparts. Small wonder middle eastern migrants, particularly Muslims, feel under siege.

Fred Nile racist, or just playing politics?

Erik de Castro Lopo has responded to yesterday's post about Fred Nile's recent conversion to racism.

Erik makes the pedantic claim that Islam is not a race. In this era of the dog whistle I thought this hardly bore arguing. By arguing against the Islamic religion, Nile is talking in code to racist voters, while keeping himself slightly distant from overt racism. If Nile were really being honest and talking about the religions he really despises, he'd argue against Catholicism. Like most fundies, I'm sure he hates "Papists" more than even atheists! That would certainly tie in with his argument for banning full-body religious dress, since this is worn by both types of religious extremist.

Then Erik goes on to defend immigration controls. He poses the hypothetical "Zebuts" who aim to overthrow current governments and replace them with a new system. If done non-violently and democratically, I don't see a problem here. You can't argue against the will of the people and claim to believe in democracy. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the view of Kissinger-style democracy where the people must keep voting until they get it "right", as currently being imposed on Palestine.

Next he makes some claims about Islam to back up why Muslims should be kept out. I'll change just a couple of words, and include some references to back up my assertions.

The Dutch are traditionally liberal, yes. These days they're increasingly racist. Hence the "Civic Integration Exam".

Finally, claiming that democracy is not about the majority imposing its will on the minority is pretty laughable. It's precisely the nature of democracy. What about the (large) Dutch minority opposed to the "Civic Integration Exam", to use one example? What about the will of people who, non-violently, smoke dope?

If you want anything other than the tyrany of the majority, you need a benevolent dictatorship. Allow me to offer my services ;)

Fred Nile: racist

I don't suppose I have too many hardcore Xtians reading my blog, what with me thinking it's perfectly okay to ridicule adults who still have imaginary friends. Just in case I do, it's worth pointing out that Fred Nile, "Christian" "Democrat" leader, is a racist as well as being a narrow-minded bigot in other areas. In fact, I'm not even convinced he is a racist, but what this really shows is that he's just a politican like all the rest and he feels he's been outflanked by the even-more-narrow minded Family First pinheads.

Nile has come out saying there should be a morotorium on Islamic immigration. Of course, he's happy for the "persecuted" Xtians from the Middle East to arrive in droves. I mean, these guys are paragons of virtue, having never done anything dodgy at all.

Ethical dilemma: "defence" industry employers

I've just received a job description for a contract at a software company whose customers include a bunch of organizations in the killing business. Australian, New Zealand and Malaysian Navy, Australian "Defence" Industries, Boeing. I've always been adamant that I won't work in such industries. But where do you draw the line? In my line of work, the biggest employment sector tends to be in the death industries.

I believe this project is working on their evidence-management product. So this would be working in law enforcement type stuff, as opposed to baby killers. But the company definitely works in "defence", though they have nothing directly to do with making guns, bombs and the like.

So where does one draw the line? Quite a difficult one to decide. Your thoughts?

Sex shops sell porn: SHOCK!

Our ever-smart coppers have made a shock revelation in the Sydney's red light district. The sex shops there sell porn!

Australia's film classification system allows for a bunch of different ratings, with R being the highest allowed in the states and X being the most explicit and only legally sold in the territories (ACT and NT). So legally the X films aren't supposed to be sold in NSW but they have been openly on sale for decades.

I used to work in the porn industry back in the early 90s. At the time I'd never been into a Kings Cross sex shop and when I first visited one on business, I was quite shocked to find they stocked X-rated videos and displayed them quite openly. I figured (as we sold them wholesale X porn from Canberra) they were available but under-the-counter or using some other sleight of hand. So I was quite surprised by them being available.

Thing is, the cops can't avoid knowing about this, so there has to be some level of official corruption. Yet you get them coming over all innocent with statements like:
Information from this case led to police conducting undercover operations in the shops to determine the type of material that was being sold.

and:
Despite the stores openly displaying the apparently X-rated material, worth millions of dollars, on their shelves, Ms Hayes said the sale of the material had been going undetected for some time.

Yes I'm sure it would have been hard to work out. It would have been impossible for them to have noted down a couple of titles from the films and search for the title in the OFLC database. I mean, searching for one of the titles we used to sell took all of a minute to confirm it's rated X.

Yet more evidence that the NSW Police are institutionally corrupt. Not that this should be news.

Grubby deals and doings between Liberals and crazy Jesus freaks

It's starting to come out the grubby links between the Liberal Party and the extremist separatist Christian cult Exclusive Brethren. Expect the story about their ads being billed to the Liberal Party to be buried quick smart while the Libs make the shome mishtake, shurely? defence.

Next time you see an advert claiming Greens policies will result in compulsory sex changes, your daughter being skull-fucked by heathen hippies and dope smoking becoming mandatory, remember to think "who's paying for this".

All voters in Australia would do well to learn more about this weird cult. They're not the usual fairy-believers. Much weirder and more sinister.

The right reason to ban the flag

The Big Day Out are discouraging people from taking Australian flags to the festival because they're worried about boneheads draping themselves in the flag. A better reason would be because our flag is crap and includes, prominently, the flag of another country. It's about time we got a better one.

Perhaps we could also get rid of our cringe-worthy national anthem (who the fuck says "girt"?) and replace it with a much more appropriate song about a sheep-shagging itinerant thief.

While we're at it, might I suggest the Romanov Solution? Oh I'm going to Gitmo for that!