I've never heard of Rowan before, and can only judge him on his comments here. If what you say is true - rather than simply questioning official Israeli dogma - I'm certainly interested...
You can see some of his comments on http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/. I'm afraid you have to go through most of them as the references which establish his agenda are here and there among his comments.
Questionaing Israeli dogma, for the most part, is not antisemitism.
Very slight. I might say stabbed viciously in the heart rather than just stabbed in the heart. And I might say neo-nazi sympathiser rather than noted white supremist.
But that is about it.
It is enough that Rowan is embarrassed enough to offer a slight rebuff.
I am not familiar with Australian law, but if someone wanted to establish a Christian identity for australia, including giving highly preferential treatment to Christian immigrants, banning Christian to non-Christian marriage and forbidding non-Christian missionary work in Australia, would you consider that person to be out of the mainstream of political diaglog in Austrlia? How would you label such a person?
Would such policy constitue a change to australian law, and if so would you be in favor of such change?
Brian – I would label such a person a white supremacist and an ideologue. Sadly, people of such persuasion are gaining increasing traction within our Islamophobic political mainstream.
Once upon a time Australia had what was called The White Australia Policy. You can read more about it here: http://www.immi.gov.au/facts/08abolition.htm
I would, in no way, shape, or form be in favour of the return of this policy or any policy that is even vaguely similar.
However, Polywise, this is the policy that exists in most of the Islamic world, which is increasingly becoming Ameriphobic, regardless of the islamo-terrorism in the world.
16 Comments:
Thanks.
Guilty by association? I distance myself from any kind of extremism, neo-Nazis etc, and tell the reality as I see it.
Let the public decide...
I suspect the pic is a piss-take, surely not real? Then again, if it's in the US, who knows...
Sorry Antony, but by giving Rowan Berkley, a well-known neo-nazi sympathiser a go, you have initiated the guilt by association log.
Rowan is known for attempting to foist his antisemitic agenda on the back of palestinian support blogs. "Enemy of my enemy" sort of thing.
I've never heard of Rowan before, and can only judge him on his comments here. If what you say is true - rather than simply questioning official Israeli dogma - I'm certainly interested...
You can see some of his comments on
http://peacepalestine.blogspot.com/. I'm afraid you have to go through most of them as the references which establish his agenda are here and there among his comments.
Questionaing Israeli dogma, for the most part, is not antisemitism.
Very slight. I might say stabbed viciously in the heart rather than just stabbed in the heart. And I might say neo-nazi sympathiser rather than noted white supremist.
But that is about it.
It is enough that Rowan is embarrassed enough to offer a slight rebuff.
I am not familiar with Australian law, but if someone wanted to establish a Christian identity for australia, including giving highly preferential treatment to Christian immigrants, banning Christian to non-Christian marriage and forbidding non-Christian missionary work in Australia, would you consider that person to be out of the mainstream of political diaglog in Austrlia? How would you label such a person?
Would such policy constitue a change to australian law, and if so would you be in favor of such change?
Rowan Berkeley said...
Saying that I am "well-known", or "noted",...is, alas, exaggeration.
So you are a little-known neo-nazi and sympathiser for white supremists?
Fine.
Brian, I think you may be on to something. Are you comparing this to what it is like in the Arab Islamic world?
Brian – I would label such a person a white supremacist and an ideologue. Sadly, people of such persuasion are gaining increasing traction within our Islamophobic political mainstream.
Once upon a time Australia had what was called The White Australia Policy. You can read more about it here: http://www.immi.gov.au/facts/08abolition.htm
I would, in no way, shape, or form be in favour of the return of this policy or any policy that is even vaguely similar.
However, Polywise, this is the policy that exists in most of the Islamic world, which is increasingly becoming Ameriphobic, regardless of the islamo-terrorism in the world.
ibrahamav, what's your point?
Just because such a policy exists in most of the Islamic world does not make it justifiable or appropriate for Australia.
But Poly, the point is that the policy does not exist in Australia and it does exist in most of the islamic world.
Ibrahamav,
The question is do you think the policies list above would be a reasonable for Australia?
Do you think the Jewish community in Australia would support such policies.
Polywise, I didn't bring up race, just religion. There are many christians of different race all over the world.
-b
N, I don't think Aussies, whether jewish or not, would support such measures.
Your decision to avoid a direct answer is answer enough.
Post a Comment
<< Home