Pauline Hanson - Is She Racist?

Look at it for this logical perspective Garry17.

If Islam is a religion that doesn't accept and promote child molestation. Then, where are all the so-called moderate Muslims in Australia objecting to it, and speaking out about it, and saying it is wrong?

Where are all the so-called moderate Muslims publicly saying that Islam is wrong for teaching its followers that gay individuals should be killed, and women strung up by the breasts and left to die for infidelity?

The silence is deafening.

 

I also have no doubts that Islam, and anyone who follows Islam or supports Islam are paedoplies.

No one cannot hide for the truth and facts anymore that Islam accepts and promotes paedophilia; violence towards gay individuals, and discrimination towards women.

 

I Disagree. Hatred is not necessarily the basis for racism. That is a word used by the stary eyed, lefty, do-gooder apologists towards people who have a different opinion. They use it for the emotive impact in their attempts to bring down anyone who does not agree with them. Easier to discredit the other person than put up an argument in your own favour.

 

Spot on Crank.

 

Yes. We are constantly bombarded by the do-gooders and black people how white people enslaved blacks, but you never hear anything about white slavery.

The poor blacks always have to get all the empathy and sympathy, like slavery only happened to their race.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-irish-slave-trade-the-forgotten-white-slaves/31076

http://www.ancient-origins.net/ancient-places-africa/white-slaves-barbary-002171

 

How infantile can an adult get; transforming into a sooky Baby and dobbing another member into a moderator.

 

Yes yes and yes.
A more important question emerges, to what extent is racism acceptable?
Cheers

 

To no extent M2. I believe there is ignorance of circumstances and then there is blissful ignorance, which is racism.

Just digressing a bit but I also believe that all racists have pedophillic tendencies.

 

As I originally pointed out, racism actually has its basis from ignorance. A point the resident bigot has decided since taking stance on opposing to such previously in the thread. I do believe the hypocritical comment of the opposing demonstrates such.

If you seriously want to discuss racism and how it is used by the ignorant and the Gullible in attempts to shut down debate then that is another issue completely.

If you wish to discuss the point of what racism is, then I suggest creation of a thread pointing that out.

BUT if you want to enter a thread labelling somebody else as racist, created by a person who has already demonstrated their own bigotry and racism, then I do point out that your issue is not that you believe racism is based in hatred (which I now see as a poor choice in worlds). But that of disgust for the willing ignorance of the ALP drone who created the thread.

HOWEVER, racism is clear demonstration of people ignorance. Just as bigotry is clearly the willing ignorance of those who choose to be led in food and thought. Racism is a belief in one’s own superior racial breading which in itself, while ignorant, ignores the fundamentals of life. TO act on that racism is born from the hatred of anything different to those who hold such a belief. If you take the literal meaning and understanding of the term racism then yes, hatred is not a requirement to be racist, but it is a requirement to act on such.

I am sorry, but as I originally pointed out the thread is considerably skewed. Considering a bigoted racist created a thread attempting to label somebody else as a racist, I am not sure ANYBODY could take them seriously…

 

Personally, I have many reasons to believe the basic concept that ALL Muslims are not in this belief and it comes to the point of so many different beliefs and interpretations (which is more disconcerting than one faith believe one thing).

IMO I do believe that Muslims are not prepared to stand against what they do not believe because of repercussions of those who benefit from such and those who blindly follow such beliefs (you know those ignorant drones) because it comes from the supposedly more religious than themselves.

When it comes to this religious crap, logic is out the window.

 

Nah, I know what is happening. I just don't see the point in arguing with people who only has one style.

I am afraid it is you who has jumped to the wrong conclusion here. As I have already drawn a conclusion to the protagonists in this, any consideration of serious debate about this topic is out the window. If serious discussion is wanted on this topic and not simply an incredulous anonymous poster trying to discredit somebody for not believing in their indoctrinated political view then I would suggest a thread far better considered.

Considering the premise of the thread was to demonise Pauline Hanson, I do believe that clearly demonstrates the creator of the thread personal intent.

 

As you can see, some sieves can have some pretty big holes in em.

Ignorance does not = racism.

Hate of another race = racism

Yeah there are anomolies, but KISS. You do get the odd knob who wants to pontificate by convoluting discussion and accosting anyone who wants to disagree with their ravings. I think some people seek relevance in this manner.

 

Yeas, she is racist, but more importantly, she is a divisive and polarising figure, who, despite being on and about the political scene for about 20 or so years, has achieved absolutely nothing for Australia other than to attract interest we could do without. She is dangerous because many people who do not understand what they are mouthing, hear what she says, and conclude, "Gee, that sounds like a solution to the gripes I have with the World and my shallow appreciation of what is happening." We are grateful they are in a minority and likely will remain so until the inevitable occurs and Pauline implodes into ridicule.

She hit the scene in 1996 and made a tit of herself with her maiden speech. On the very night she delivered it, in her Motel Room in Canberra, she huckered down and dirty overnight with none other than one David Oldfield, who was then a staffer for Tony Abbott, then a Senior member of Howard's Liberal Government. All she knew about him was that his name was 'David' and that he could not tell her his surname because of the nature of his employment. It seems all she wanted was sex and all he was doing, he has said, was his job as a Liberal Party stooge. I guess he was pumping her for information, and she had no idea she had fallen for a reverse honey trap. Oldfield later 'left' Abbott and became a full time One Nation advisor and with Hanson and David Oldfield, established the Pauline Hanson One Nation Party......one of three members. As history demonstrates, it all unravelled, but, now we have, history repeating itself.

Back in 1996, her targets were Aboriginals and Asians, the happy bandwagon the rednecks jumped on to. They were the naked nerve ends she utilised, and her talent for division emerged.

This time around, she seems to have abandoned her attacks on Aboriginals and Asians, and has taken up the topical bash of anything Islamic. She has tapped into, yet again, fertile ground which, as time passes and her ignorance emerges yet again inevitably will become as barren as her earlier fields of cultivation. Yet again, she has chosen a flawed individual to become her closest media advisor, one James Ashby who was a central Liberal Party stooge used by the Liberals to bring down their traitor Peter Slipper who accepted a nomination by the Labor Party to become Speaker of the House of Representatives. This woman just never learns.

Instead of staying out of the spotlight and quietly getting on with it, she is accepting media engagements which are exposing her racist bigotry yet again. Today week, she features in a documentary to be screened on SBS where she not only gloats about her fling with David Oldfield she is seen noticing a member of the filming crew. He does not look Caucasian, so she asks of him, 'Are you a refugee?' He says, 'No, I'm Aboriginal.' Her comment which then followed was, '“Really? Wouldn’t have picked it. It’s good to see that you’re actually, you know, taking up this and working.”' There you go, Pauline stunned an Aboriginal man might actually have a job and be working in the media.....not that there aren't many just like that man. Racist to the core, and the only thing which she might offer in defence is that she may have absolutely no idea just how condescendingly so, she is.

 

Note this which is part of a brief exchange between a Labor Politician Sam Dastyari and Hanson on the most recent Q&A programme on ABC TV (Aus.) Dastyari was born in Iran, and his parents fled when he was five to come to Australia. Sam asks Pauline to acknowledge that her blanket ban on Muslim immigration would have prevented a five year old (successful Australian) Sam entering Australia. Note how she does not answer the question but is all over him like a rash about whether he is a Muslim. (He is not....he is an atheist.)

[video=youtube;Zd6dLIgGLT0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zd6dLIgGLT0[/video]

 

Could you offer some evidence that "Islam accepts and promotes paedophilia"?

age of consent in european american history

 

I have seen this rubbish posted elsewhere by Muslim/Islam apologists. This rubbish is always used by the Muslim/Islam apologists to excuse Muslims/Islam for allowing adult men to have sex with under age children via the teaching of their current Islamic religion. Sorry, but Humanity is living in 2016, not the 1960's or the 1900 hundreds.

I have a question for you. Can you offer some evidence that "Islam" doesn't accept and promote paedophilia?

 

There is a current argument from the Muslim/Islam apologists that many so-called moderate Muslims don’t agree with the current philosophies and teaching of Islam.
We are suppose to believe these are the Muslims that want Islam reformed, so it can progress into modern times as many other religions have done.

I personally don’t believe this rubbish, because if there were enough moderate Muslims wanting philosophical religious change within Islam; then they would have started trying to change it by now. If these moderate Muslims really wanted change, then they certainly would not be voting in radical Islamic Imams into power positions within their religious communities. If suggested, there are a high percentage of so-called moderate Muslims within our society and communities who don’t agree with the fanatical teaching of Islam. Then where are these moderate Muslims, and why are they not publicly speaking out against these fanatical teaching?

Martin Luther and his followers separated from the Catholic church around 1517. During a period, when separation from the Mother church meant physical torture and death, by being burnt at the stake. They also did this during a time without any support, and without any Government or police protection - not like so-called moderate Muslims would get today if they spoke out.

I am sorry, but so-called moderate Muslims living in Australia in 2016, who seriously wanted change within Islam and wanted to reform Islam would not suffer the same physical & psychological consequences as individuals would have suffered in the 15th century, when the Protestants separated from the Catholic church.

I have heard all this nonsense before from Muslim/Islam apologists how modern day Muslims are to scared and afraid to speak out about fanatical Islam, and the excuses are only valid to those with low intelligence.

I don’t believe for one second there are moderate Muslims living in Australia or any other country.

To be a Muslim, you have to believe in all facets of Islam, and follow the teaching of Islam, and Islam has undergone no modern reformation form its antiquated religious teaching and beliefs towards other human beings, who are not of the Islamic faith.

I'm sorry, but my intellect tells me: "if it walks like a duck; looks like a duck and quacks like a duck - then its a duck, not a cat".

 

This is true in one sense, BUT it also remains that no clear direction can be given until majority are in the similar. As you can see on these forum pages, it is easy to follow but a war to the last for change.

It is irrelevant if you or I believe or not. However, I do believe it takes a certain type of evil to simply allow one’s own offspring to be seriously compromised to the point of death for a faith that teaches children are the plaything of the chosen few. I cannot in all seriousness believe an entire religious faith is so evil. Considering the amount of difference in this faith, considering certain areas preach that suicide bombers are martyrs, well needless to say, how do these people reconcile themselves with their death being oppressed to killing to impress their religion???

different time, with different circumstance BUT, the underlying point I do agree with.

fair enough

Well, talking about moderate Muslims being this and that, fact is and my only point about Islam is that none of them agree with the same ideology. Just as Christian beliefs have created some terrible deeds so does Islam. However, this does not indicate that ALL Muslims and Christians believe such. True the cowardice of those who oppose such can be seen by all, which is where the term for martyr originated.

 

Odd that a Thread which is meant to be addressing Hanson is now one about Islam.

 

It does seem odd, but considering this is the most contentious issue Hanson seems to have at present, it is simply taking a further step.

What I find odd, The OP attempts to vilify Hanson as a racist due to her anti-Muslimism stance(in general) yet that is not racism. After all, what race is the religion Islam???

However, the premise of the thread demonstrates the ignorance of the OP to comprehend the difference between racism and bigotry, the rest is just garden salad…

 

I certainly missed your 2 comments here. I think it's a demonstration of how ignorant this woman is and certainly lack of any intellect. Absolutely not the brightest light on the Christmas tree.

She's pretty slow on any uptake. It took her at least 20 years to realise that there was a whole other background story on Aborigines. She also now understands that Asians aren't the threat she fearfully expressed. Now she wants both aborigines and Asians to back her on another issue. 10 years from now Muslims will be in her good books and will flow with whatever other racial flavour there happens to be. It'll be the Russians!

 

Thanks for this piece, I haven't bothered following anything she does, I find my self cringing with embarrassment for her everytime she speaks. I think importantly that again only 95% of Australians voted for her, the majority of the votes came from Queenslanders who are reknown for being the bogan backward state of Australia.

 

Garry, as a new Member, my posts are moderated before they appear so I lose context (and, I have to say ~ motivation in participating given it took almost 36 hours for those two posts of mine to appear, but.....to soldier on...) yeas, there is always the pretty silly point to make that 'Muslim' is not a race. That, while cute, is impractical, and one which takes us nowhere. She wants to stop 'Muslim' immigration. She has not told us how that can be done given Section 116 of our Constitution. In this debate, let's call a spade a spade. Being anti Islam in a secular bigotted way is racist. Let's not get bogged down in pedantry.

[Well....it seems I am not now being pre-moderated and my post appeared immediately, so...that's great.]

 

Sorry but religion is not a race, therefore discrimination against religion is NOT racism but merely discrimination. I agree with your thoughts that we are splitting hairs, but in this case I do stand with Garry on this.

If we want to get the argument correct lets start by defining it correctly, lets not get lazy and then hide behind the fact we are splitting hairs. It is the fact that the word racism is being used out of context so regularly that nobody really understands its true context, and this is what is bogging down debate.

We all discriminate in one form or the other in every single day of our lives, but not all of us are racist. So trying to define racism and discrimination as one in the same is not only unfair but ridiculous by nature of the true meaning of the words themselves.

Racism and discrimination are two different beasts that although may share the same father are different in true definition.

Discrimination is practised daily by all.
Racism is not. Thankfully.

 

Nice play on words, but the facts remain. A religion is not a race, an no one can accuse another individual of being racist against a religion without looking like a tool.