NEWS: Australian treasurer Peter Costello tells Muslims "Accept our ways or leave"

Australian treasurer Peter Costello tells Muslims "If you don't like Australia's laws, get out" amid Melbourne factory worker's publicized fear of working amid the men who assaulted a news crew last week.
The Treasurer also said anyone who wanted to live under Islamic law would never be happy here.
This was just televised and I have yet to find more news sources online of this particular event, however will update as more news becomes available online.




I feel he could have expressed himself better, he seemed very arrogant and even angry on the Current Affairs program I just saw this televised on.
And from where I am sitting, aimed it at Muslims in general, even the people they asked on the street were basically saying the same thing, in very general terms.

Does he WANT to upset people ?

I do not see what one thing has to do with the other in regard to the workers at the factory not wanting to work amid the men who assaulted a camera crew during the raids on the arrested Muslim men last week and telling Muslims "we will never be an Islamic state."
(Who exactly asked you to change your laws ? )

This apparently inspired Peter Costello to prepare this speech of his.
I did like the term "hard liner Muslims" though, this does differntiate the extremists to the faithful, as opposed to these terms I Am hearing "Jihadists" and so on.

I will try find some more on this latest incident, please feel free to do so also.
Seems Mr Costello likes to tell people to leave his country, visit links below to see what I mean. I fear he is suggesting it now to the wrong people.

Let's keep it civil if you have information to share please






Related News Links:
www.abc.net.au
headlines.sify.com


If someone would be so kind as to suggest how I should fix this posting it would be appreciated as this is the first time I have submitted news. (I keep getting the U2U's but have no idea what more I need to add)
Thank you.



[edit - Introduction paragraph]


[edit on 11-11-2005 by ImJaded]

[edit on 11-11-2005 by ZeddicusZulZorander]

Australia has a pretty poor record on immigration and the like, having rejected all non-acceptable (and this was almost universally meant to be non-whites) immigrants for a very long time. And their track record on the aboriginal aussies is, from what i understand, pretty dismal too.

On the other hand, whats the sense of moving somewhere and then not assimilating?

I think the key line to the man's diatrabe is
hard-line Muslims
from reading the article, it does not look like he is attacking muslims as a whole just the hard-line Muslims or extremists.
I would be very interested if you can post a link to the newstory that seems have been the seed that started this all. The one where the men attacked the cameraman. It will put a proper perspective on all of this as well as provide a clearer understanding of the circumstances.

The Treasurer didn't say anything wrong. He didn't target Muslims for oppression of any sort. If a cleric delivers a sermon that calls for the creation of an Islamic State in Australia (which I assume is extremely rare) or otherwise detracts from the secular nature of the australian society, they should be deported.

tell it to the US government. they believe so strongly in freedom of speech, that they ignore this sort of rhetoric from mosques in the states.

i firmly agree with the aussie treasurer, and think its a stance we should take here.

i wish one of our lawmakers would have the intestinal fortitude to say something like this:

"everyone is welcome, but start preaching hate and youre going to be deported. furthermore, we will no longer change any rules for your benifit. take us as we are, or leave."

[edit on 11-11-2005 by snafu7700]

How very democratic of him...

I always thought it was;

If you do not like our way of life, vote another Government in. Oh wait...he means just Muslim's. We've not yet got to the point of "Our way or leave our Nation".

What about the Muslim's who were born their and don't like the laws?

Should I stay or should I go?

I totally agree with the statement. Anyone who wants to live under Sharia law should move to Saudi Arabia or the Sudan or something, not to a Western democratic country.

odium....correct me if i'm wrong, but isnt australia a democracy? wouldnt that mean that a majority vote decides how things are run? if you are in the minority, why should you think that the whole country should change its laws because of you?

that is whats wrong with my country at the moment. in our attempt to be PC, we are caving into the demands of a minority of people at the expense of the majority. now, before anybody starts calling me names, i'm not talking about race here, i'm talking religion. the majority's christian ideals (ideals that this country was originally founded on) are being completely stripped from our way of life by a minority of americans. when a prayer offends one person in an entire school, and therefore prayer at a football game is no longer allowed, that is the minority dictating to the majority.
i could go on and on, but i think i've made my point.

Hey, I am a scandinavian, living in scandinavia.
Now, the weak politicians are printing voting propaganda posters in arabic!

I cannot read it, but why would I. -unless for educating myself in lingo?
If I had to flee to a foreign country to survive, I would do my outmost to integrate myself into that community. -LEARNING THE LANGUAGE!
Why it all has become an issue, is that we are welcoming (willing/unwillingly) far more people than the government are being able to help out. Heck, the government aren't even able to help out their own! How, and why should we even let ourselves become adaptive towards THEIR religion, THEIR language and THEIR laws?!? I don't get it! If I, as a norwegian/swedish/danish, go to Iran, I DON'T believe I will be allowed to watch porn, date or party, hell I would most likely not even find work, being a non-muslim. or dog, whichever level of fundamentalism I would meet on my journeys.
If You are in my country/house, You live by my rules! Otherwise P*** off!

snafu7700, doesn't everyone though?

Isn't that what part of a democracy is, people saying "This is how I think it should be done" and when the majority disagree than we have a democratic process. When we begin to say "Hold our view point or leave" it in fact stops being a democracy.

If they do not win enough seats in Government to have a say, allow them to voice their opinion and if those in Government [who have won a seat] begin to think their treatment is unfair [or the people do and elect people who share the views] things will change. However removing their ability to make these statements and telling them to leave is highly undemocratic. In fact, it infringes on a basic right to hold our own views and to speak our mind.

Should everyone in a Nation not be able to take part in the process of democracy no matter their view point? If a few muslim's wish to push Sharia law through, allow them to say they do and watch as they do not get voted into power.

snafu7700, on another note:

America wasn't founded on a Christian Ideology. It was invaded by people of a Christian faith. It is ironic that you make this arguement when the Christian's came with a religion, highly different and began to force convertions on people who didn't hold this faith. When you then make out as though Muslim's doing the same thing is wrong...

One can't be and the other can be, they both have to be wrong. Dislike what the Muslim's are doing in the United States? I dislike the millions of Native American's [my blood] who were killed by people doing the same thing.

originally posted by odium
One can't be and the other can be, they both have to be wrong. Dislike what the Muslim's are doing in the United States? I dislike the millions of Native American's [my blood] who were killed by people doing the same thing.

i too have native american blood, and although this isnt the time and place for this discussion, i will respond to your remarks.

although i agree that native americans got a bad deal, it was nothing worse than what they had been doing to each other for millenia. one nation would attack and push another out of an area in order to occupy the hunting grounds. which is exactly what the europeans did. you know this is true, so dont bother argueing. was it right? no. did it happen? yes. should we continue to dwell on it for eternity? no, we should move on. does it give a minority the right to impose their beliefs on the majority? definitely not. if you want to continue to debate this elswhere, start a thread, i will be more than happy to join it. but this isnt the place for that one in my opinion.

[edit on 11-11-2005 by snafu7700]

The Australians have it right, and at least they have the kahonies to stand up and defend their way of life. That's right....their way. No bowing down to others, and being concerned about PC and relations with countries that don't really give a damn about them anyways.

You no likey? Then see ya!

You claimed it was [and I quote] "the majority's christian ideals (ideals that this country was originally founded on)" and I pointed out, that the "Country" was around long before and that many of these actions are the same.

one nation would attack and push another out of an area in order to occupy the hunting grounds.

Which is something that Christian's as good as did for hundreds of years, up till the Second World War.

The only major difference here, is you have a few million muslims saying they 'want' something, which they will never get in the United States or Australia unless they gain a massive amount of support - which we know won't happen.

However, removing their ability to hold a viewpoint different from yours is wrong on a basic democratic level. Without basic freedoms to have our say, to vote for any party we like and to speak out against laws, we leave in a democracy by name only and not by its actions.

nathraq, would you welcome that wherever you live?

If people disagree with your 'Leaders' viewpoints, question his actions, laws he passes, etc, they should be sent away?

Where is it you live and who is it you voted for?

Well, let me see......


If I lived, say in Australia, that is a culture of Europeans, based on European ideology, code of law, morals, and religious beliefs, that has endured a couple of hundred years, and that culture was being invaded by people with an ideology and belief system that all Western nations are Satanic, and deserve the sword, then no, his words were not harsh; actually they were not harsh enough.

nathraq, again the European's held those same views when they landed in Australia.

You forgot they took the land from another group of people, who they held to be 'Satanic'. You have also made a generalisation upon Muslim's.

What if they just disagree with a law many other Australian's do? for example the Anti-Terror laws?

Where do you place the line?

originally posted by odium
You claimed it was [and I quote] "the majority's christian ideals (ideals that this country was originally founded on)" and I pointed out, that the "Country" was around long before and that many of these actions are the same.

no, people occupied this land long before. this country was founded in 1776 with christian ideals.

Which is something that Christian's as good as did for hundreds of years, up till the Second World War.

what, specifically, are you refering to here? a little background would help the discussion.

The only major difference here, is you have a few million muslims saying they 'want' something, which they will never get in the United States or Australia unless they gain a massive amount of support - which we know won't happen.

really? how about the schools that are cancelling normal religious holidays such as christmas because they offend muslims?

However, removing their ability to hold a viewpoint different from yours is wrong on a basic democratic level. Without basic freedoms to have our say, to vote for any party we like and to speak out against laws, we leave in a democracy by name only and not by its actions.

go back and read the story. nobody is saying that muslims can not hold a particular view. what they are saying is that religious scare tactics (ie, scaring other workers with threats) are not going to be tolerated. furthermore, that a minority of people in the country are not going to be allowed to change the laws in their favor, against the majority. nowhere did it say that muslims could not express their views in a peaceful manner.

snafu7700, why should a school celebrate Christmas?

How many Muslim's actually called for it to be cancelled? In fact, I remember watching a BBC show where they spent 30minutes interviewing 'Muslims', all of which supported the Church of England and said that Christmas was a good idea.

Again, you make out as though 'Muslims' want Christmas gone, when I have never met one who does and live on a road where I am in the minority being white and a non-Muslim. In fact, out of the 60 houses on the road, less then 10 of them are owned by non-Muslim people. However, they actually wish Merry Christmas too the people and help to put up decorations - many taking part in it as well.

This again comes back into your statement on 'Religious Scare Tactics', snafu7700, where does it say their actions are fine in the Qu'Ran? For it to be a religious action it has to be from the Qu'Ran or a decree agreeded upon by a vast majority of Imam's. Can you display this?

If not, it is the actions of a few people and again the majority being targetted and punished for it. As for the Government not calling for it - people are calling for it. It is on this site if you even look at this thread it is clear.

Source
There are Islamic states around the world that practice Sharia law, and if that is your object, you may well be more at home in such a country than trying to turn Australia into one of those countries - because it is not going to happen," he said.

If it is not going to happen, than it is fine for them to try. I do not see why it isn't?

If they wish to claim it will, allow it.
If they break the laws, such as assaulting people, punish them.

However do not tell them to 'leave' because you disagree with their viewpoint. Which in my opinion is what is happening.

originally posted by odium
snafu7700, why should a school celebrate Christmas?

again, this country was founded on christian ideals. dont muslim country's schools celebrate their holidays? anyway, why US schools should celebrate christmas is not the point. the fact that they are trying to stop the holidays in order to be more PC towards muslims is, regardless of whether or not the muslims actually want it. as i recall, the muslim woman in question didnt want christmas banned, she wanted her holiday added, and the schools response was to cancel christmas instead.

why is it that jews do not complain about their holidays not being honored in american schools? but that is another discussion i guess.

In fact, I remember watching a BBC show where they spent 30minutes interviewing 'Muslims', all of which supported the Church of England and said that Christmas was a good idea.

again, that is not in contention. however, it is funny that you have made it clear you are in england. are you british, or "american indian", as you stated before?

This again comes back into your statement on 'Religious Scare Tactics', snafu7700, where does it say their actions are fine in the Qu'Ran? For it to be a religious action it has to be from the Qu'Ran or a decree agreeded upon by a vast majority of Imam's. Can you display this?

really? so i guess all of the terrorists who are ignoring the decrees of imam's to stop the bloodshed are definitely not muslims then?

and the kids in france ignoring the imam's decrees to stop rioting are not muslims either, right?

i never said that all muslims are bad. i never said that all muslims agree with the actions of a few. but if you actually read the post, the muslims in question did threaten their co-workers. in the environment we live in with muslim extremists using their extremism to attack others, these kind of threats are not to be taken lightly.

If not, it is the actions of a few people and again the majority being targetted and punished for it. As for the Government not calling for it - people are calling for it. It is on this site if you even look at this thread it is clear.

again, try reading the report. the government is not saying "all muslims get out", they are saying that they will not tolerate islamic extremism, and that the majority will not cave to the minority. you can try to spin it anyway you want, but that is what the article says.

quote: Source
There are Islamic states around the world that practice Sharia law, and if that is your object, you may well be more at home in such a country than trying to turn Australia into one of those countries - because it is not going to happen," he said.
If it is not going to happen, than it is fine for them to try. I do not see why it isn't?

sure, its perfectly ok to attempt to use democracy in order to change things in a democratic country. but when you cant get it your way because you are in the minority, it is not ok to resort to scare tactics.

However do not tell them to 'leave' because you disagree with their viewpoint. Which in my opinion is what is happening.

and you are certainly entitled to that opinion. however, i disagree, because that is not what he is saying. he is telling people that if they want to live in an islamic country, they should move, because australia is not, and will not become one. he is not saying that all muslims should leave.

i notice you still have not answered my question in reference to your statement:

Which is something that Christian's as good as did for hundreds of years, up till the Second World War.

what, specifically, are you refering to here? a little background would help the discussion.