Unofficial Christ's Hospital Forum

I just received the following from a fellow Old Blue. Would you like to comment on whether or not you support the message? (Though I recognise that it must be a bit 'old' as the PM in question has now been replaced by Kevin.....and I suppose it's just possible that it's already on the Forum and I have missed it!)

"England Needs A Leader Like This!

Prime Minister John Howard - Australia

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia , as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.
Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: 'IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.'
'This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom'
'We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!'
'Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.'
'We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.'
'This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,
'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.'
'If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.'

Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, American /Englishcitizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths".

Seeing as it was me who posted it to you, I have to say that it did strike a chord!

In the week that the present PM has made a public apology about the treatment of certain children, my reaction is to say 'Have you forgotten the aborigines? They lived in Australia long before any white person but don't appear to exist in your vision of your country.'

I've already had my wrist 'slapped' for making my view known on Britains stance on Immigration on another forum I frequent !

Let me just say that I have always admired Australia's view.

'nuff said ?

although what was said was a little strong im sure it had struck a chord with many.
I think that the majority of immigrants come to this country as the believe they will get the life they want etc adn most embrace our cutlute-learn english , abide by our law and keep their culture and traidtions going in the home and where appropriate.
I think it is a very smalle % that kick up the fuss about how although they live here they shouldnt have to respect/accept our culture and way of living-but they seem to create the loudest noise

I'm pro-immigration, indeed I'm an immigrant myself at the moment, in Italy. I think the world would be a better place without such hostile and restrictive borders.

I'm pro-immigration but I also am happy to see what was said. I believe strongly that people should have the right of choice to move to other countries if they wish, but only if they coexist happily with the lifestyle, language, religion, traditions and customs. I am proud that the UK is so tolerant of other cultures, and allows people of other cultures and religions to worship here and to live their lives how they like. If a Briton went to certain countries (s)he would have to make sacrifices such as abstaining from alcohol, dressing moderately, not saying anything critical of either the government, monarchy or God. I believe that we should allow immigrants to keep their religion and national customs, as long as they do not let it take over the customs of our own country. If they're unhappy with the lifestyle here, then they should go somewhere else, as they are free to do.

The fact is that the source is Australian. Critics are bound to let the argument of the Aborigines divert it from the valid point that the source was trying to make. If you think it's hypocritical for an Australian to make a statement, just imagine it was a Brit making that statement.

I have had to do interviews with a school-age child acting as interpreter for his mother because she couldn't be bothered to learn English.

Wuppertal wrote:I'm pro-immigration, indeed I'm an immigrant myself at the moment, in Italy. I think the world would be a better place without such hostile and restrictive borders.

I'm pro-immigration but I also am happy to see what was said. I believe strongly that people should have the right of choice to move to other countries if they wish, but only if they coexist happily with the lifestyle, language, religion, traditions and customs. I am proud that the UK is so tolerant of other cultures, and allows people of other cultures and religions to worship here and to live their lives how they like. If a Briton went to certain countries (s)he would have to make sacrifices such as abstaining from alcohol, dressing moderately, not saying anything critical of either the government, monarchy or God. I believe that we should allow immigrants to keep their religion and national customs, as long as they do not let it take over the customs of our own country. If they're unhappy with the lifestyle here, then they should go somewhere else, as they are free to do.

The fact is that the source is Australian. Critics are bound to let the argument of the Aborigines divert it from the valid point that the source was trying to make. If you think it's hypocritical for an Australian to make a statement, just imagine it was a Brit making that statement.

An excellent well balanced post that says it all.

Alan P5age wrote:
On the broader issue the idea that Sharia Law in this country is imminent ignores the following premisses:

...........Anybody performing a mutilation of any kind, for whatever reason, or aiding and abetting such actions should be liable to prosecution.

How many people have been prosecuted over the castration (?) of young girls of Somali and similar background carried out in the UK? Why not more if the crime continues as is alleged? Aiding and abetting also includes sending the girl to the Horn of Africa for the operation to be carried out.

There was an uproar some time ago over the prosecution under water cleanliness laws of a person who put human ashes into the Thames in accordance with Hindu tradition. We have never heard of another case; does that mean it doesn't occur or the authorities are afraid of enforcing the law?
The law is the law for everyone and should be enforced equally against / in favour of everyone equally.

As another semi-immigrant (in France) I take the view that I have to learn and speak the local language, act in accordance with local norms and also I very studiously avoid any discussion of religion, French politics, law, locally contentious subjects etc. when local people are around. I consider that that is how people of any background should behave in any foreign country.
The only "problem" I have with local Muslims (in France) is remembering not to offer them a pastis or beer (though I have made that faux pas in France and the UK and in neither country was there any offence taken)

Alan P5age wrote:

sejintenej wrote:

Alan P5age wrote:
On the broader issue the idea that Sharia Law in this country is imminent ignores the following premisses:

...........Anybody performing a mutilation of any kind, for whatever reason, or aiding and abetting such actions should be liable to prosecution.

How many people have been prosecuted over the castration (?) of young girls of Somali and similar background carried out in the UK? Why not more if the crime continues as is alleged? Aiding and abetting also includes sending the girl to the Horn of Africa for the operation to be carried out.

There was an uproar some time ago over the prosecution under water cleanliness laws of a person who put human ashes into the Thames in accordance with Hindu tradition. We have never heard of another case; does that mean it doesn't occur or the authorities are afraid of enforcing the law?
The law is the law for everyone and should be enforced equally against / in favour of everyone equally.

I agree there are cultural issues but I also still maintain that unless there are reasonable grounds for opposing it, our native civil laws should cover it. All that depends on is enforcement.

I think the problem is that we have had such poor monitoring going on that issues like arranged marriages, honour killings, etc. have been swept under the carpet in the general process of adapting to such an influx from so many parts of the world .

In the Hindu case, it should simply be stated that it is illegal to dispose of human remains in that way (under littering laws, I understand) and that some form of compromise needs be met.

Alan; the point I was trying to make is that, since we already have the laws, why are they not being enforced? The current situation is racism AGAINST the caucasian majority. (Muslims only make up about 3% of the population apparently; they are a tiny minority. Don't we have the same rights as Muslims to protest against this differentiation?

Alan P5age wrote:I suppose what we are facing is really what East and West Germany faced post reunification, a cash strapped economically destitute country being twinned with an economically developed one. I suppose the more foreign economies start to develop (as in India and China), the less need for migration there will be.
I believe our main immigrant influx is now from the Eastern Europe sector? When the money being earned here filters its way back to those countries along with the educational advantages etc. those countries will also start to expand their own economic bases, more jobs will be created in those countries and the need to migrate should lessen.
I think this is a long term levelling up process, the fruits of which we may not be around to see.

There is talk that the Polish economy is so strong and ours relatively weak that the Polish migrants are going back; the levelling you mention. I think that your reference to east and West Germany is misleading - those two voluntarily became one country and had a common history, culture and language up to 45 years before. This is different from the UK / Poland / Lithuania / Romania situations

I can accept what you are saying so long as the immigrants don't try to form enclaves but try to adopt our norms as much as possible.
Another thought; if an economic immigrant subsequently leaves to work elsewhere should he/she be allowed in a second or third time as an economic immigrant having turned his/her back on us once as being not good enough? (I exclude from this those people who are sent to work in theie UK branches / subsidiaries by their employers as part of their employment contract).

Alan P5age wrote:But the issues of law enforcement problems can, surely, be equally applied to issues such as drugs. Why, for example, is popular culture throwing up such role models for our children as Pete Doherty and Amy Winehouse when they should be facing criminal charges?

Especialy given the publicity don't you think that such people should be charged and if found guilty, hit hard? There seems to be more than usual evidence against them. They are supposed to be role models so let them be such by being put in the slammer for a couple of years (whatever the maximum sentence is) followed by compulsory spell in a clinic (at their expense!). That would show their followers what to expect if they, the followers, take drugs.
I have far less of an objection to peeps taking drugs in private so long as they do not at the time and never will in the future, affect anyone else by such behaviour. (I smoked for a very very long time but hopefuly I did it in a way which did not create passive smokers)

Alan P5age wrote:Of course this brings in the issues of targetted resources, manpower etc. It is often the case that such things are only acted on if they are reported in the first place. Even then, actions are often sluggish.

Too true, excet that reports are not always acted upon. OTOH the police are very quick to have a go at members of the public who they consider are not 100% behind them. (My wife got the 3rd degree because of something I wrote popinting out that local police publicity was false; they didn't dare confront me)

Alan P5age wrote:If we are going to tackle issues like Female Circumcision by the way, should we not also tackle male circumcision as well, particularly in infants? I suppose it all boils down to consent in the end. Anything that does not involve consent could be regarded as an assault. But how do we tell those cultures that see circumcision as a rite of passage?

I guess you are referring to Judaism rather than the medically recommended (in certain cases) proceedure. Perfectly good point; let the Chief Rabbi justify on medical or similar grounds such action against a baby.

Male circumcision is a requirement of Islam as well as Judaism.

I was going to put this on the Jokes thread but it may fit here.......

Haven't heard it put this way before, but it's a great analogy.

I bought a bird feeder. I hung it on my back patio and filled it with seed. What a beauty of a bird feeder it is was and I filled it lovingly.
Within a week there were hundreds of birds taking advantage of the continuous flow of free and easily accessible food.

But then the birds started building nests in the boards of the patio, above the table, and next to the barbecue.
Then came the poop. It was everywhere: on the patio tiles, the chairs, the table...everywhere!

Then some of the birds turned mean. They would dive bomb me and try to peck me even though I had fed them out of my own pocket.
Moreover, other birds were boisterous and loud - they sat on the feeder and squawked and screamed at all hours of the day and night
and demanded that I fill it when it got low on food.

After a while, I couldn't even sit in my own back garden anymore, so I took down the bird feeder and in three days the birds were gone.
I cleaned up their mess and took down the many nests they had built all over the patio.
Soon, the back yard was like it used to be.....quiet, serene and no one demanding their rights to a free meal.

Now let's see... Our government gives out free food, subsidized housing, free medical care, and free education and allows anyone born here to be
an automatic citizen.

Then the illegals came by the tens of thousands. Suddenly our taxes went up to pay for free services; small apartments are housing five families;
you have to wait six hours to be seen by a doctor; your child's 2nd grade class is behind other schools because over half the class doesn't speak
English.

Corn Flakes now come in a bilingual box; I have to 'press one' to hear my bank talk to me in English, and people waving flags other than the Union
Jack are squawking and screaming in the streets, demanding more rights and free liberties.

Just my opinion, but maybe it's time for the government to take down the bird feeder.

If you agree, pass it on; if not, continue cleaning up the poop!

I have no problem with the Jewish faith advocating male circumcision. It does no harm and untimately makes for a healthier life-style.

Female circumcision, (African style), is barbaric. For those of you who don't understand it, I would suggest doing a web search. Far be it for me to go into the graphic and totally unecessary detail !