Melbourne protesters march against racism : Melbourne Indymedia

An estimated 1,500 anti-racism protesters marched through the Melbourne CBD yesterday.

The rally attracted protesters from the Socialist Alliance, the Greens Party, Civil Rights Defence group and Stop Racism Now.

It stopped traffic as it weaved its way through the city to the Liberal Party state offices in Exhibition Street.

Lyn Jones from Stop Racism Now said, "John Howard has been dividing the nation by scapegoating the Muslim community."

"This has to stop now."

"How can you have ASIO dragging people out of bed to face charges of having a conversation with a group of people?"

"About something at no place and at no time? "

"Then charging them with belonging to an organisation that does not exist?"

"This is the root cause of racism," she said.

Organiser Kim Bullimore says the riots in Sydney have shown that political leaders lack the will to combat racism.

"What we need is some leadership ... actually take a stand," she said.

"I'm here today because I think that Muslim and Arab people should be welcome in our country," another protester said.

Another said: "It's not only that political leaders lack the will it is because they're winding the rest of Australia up and are making people hate Muslims by insinuating that they are all terrorists."

"We don't believe in a divided Australia."

Police guarded the entrance to the Liberal Party offices while the protest continued.

A 26-year-old Tasmanian woman was arrested and charged with assaulting a police officer and possessing drugs.

Thanks for the report. Excellent to see people collectively saying what needs to be said.

Is it possible to change that picture of the racist mob though? It could be miscontrued as being part of yesterday's rally.

It's rather disingenuous to blame John Howard (or any politician, for that matter) for the disgusting events of last weekend.

If Howard were to blame, riots of the nature witnessed in Sydney would be occurring around the country; they are not. They are localised to a specific area of one of our major cities.

And that's because there are a number of local factors specific to Sydney which are driving this disturbing behaviour.

Unlike Melbourne, for example, Sydney has a large and identifiable Muslim communty in its west, notably Lakemba. There is no equivalent in Melbourne.

Unlike Melbourne, Sydney's west has been wracked by a series of highly publicised rapes of young Anglo women by young men of Lebanese background.
Rapes which have been proven in court and which have attracted very heavy prison terms. No prejudice or discrimination here; just an account of factual events. The lack of remorse expressed by any of the convicted rapists resonated not only with the sentencing court, but across the general community. A definite culture of mysogyny was apparent in the behaviour of these gang rapists and people were very angry and afraid at this.

Unlike Sydney, Melbourne does not have any areas where the police do not venture unless in overwhelming numbers due to the real risk of serious injury or death from crowd violence. Nothing to do with John Howard, I'm afraid.

Unlike Melbourne, Sydney's Cronulla Beach has endured years of simmering racial tension (extending well before the current immigration and anti-terrorism laws) arising from a perceived mysogynistic culture amongst some young men of Middle Eastern background which was manifested in allegd harassment of female Anglo beach goers. All of this eventually exploded last weekend and the riots were born.

Disgusting, unacceptable and regrettable. Some even racist. But down to John Howard? I don' think so.

I know you must like John Howard and that's why your sticking up for him but believe me he's a dud and you shouldn't waste your time.

Howard thinks Mulims are dunny paper as he keeps wiping his arse on them for his war on terror and if you ask me this is the result!

Ask yourself why it has not happend before? That large numbers of Muslims have been downgraded not to 2nd class citizens but to suspects!

Why Sydney?

Because you don't have an Alan Jones!

Ask a silly question!

Got any more stupidy for all the thrillseekers you right wing git!

Don't count your chickens before they hatch either just because they haven't lost it in Melbourne doesn't mean it's not around the corner.

Remember if you see something say something!

Yes, I see your point Sue. Your throughtful and consise deconstruction of my argument with solid, verifiable evidence has changed my view completely.

Thankyou.

White people don't rape!

White people always show remorse!

Cops in Lakember weren't working for Lebanese Crime Gangs?

That's why they were issued orders to leave them alone and just to consentrate on everyone else.

So the slopes in Cabramatta got done and the Lebs got the guns!

That's why they had a shoot out at Lakember police station because the cops owed them!

If you really want to know!

The mountain of irrefutable and objective evidence just keeps rolling in. Thankyou, Ranni, for your thoughtful contribution.

However, I don't agree with your proposition that white people don't rape and fail to show remorse. Witness Bradley Murdoch in the NT. A non-repentant (white) rapist, murderer and drug trafficker if ever there were one.

Of course, it was the aggravated circumstances of the western Sydney gang rapes that caused such an outcry of public disquiet and anger and which stands them apart from other recent publicised rapes.

I guess my basic point is that racist attacks from either side are deplorable but are a result of a complex range of issues, some of which are the fault of police and political leaders. Blaming John Howard or any other individual (with the qualified exception of that imbecile Allan Jones) is simplistic and a cop out from a more detailed examination of the problem.

I recommend genuinely readers take a look at Paul Sheehan's thoughtful essay (linked below) in today's Sydney Morning Herald to get a better informed picture of the forces at play.

All the best.

JMcK.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/a-great-divide-takes-some-understanding/2005/12/16/1134703611534.html to

I went to Bourke St yesterday looking for an anti-racist protest.

A protest against ALL racism.

I couldn't find one. All I saw was a few people ranting about John Howard and ruining a pleasant Christmas outing for a bunch of kids.

What about the lynching of Ghanaians in Libya?

What about the ongoing slaughter in Sudan?

What about 'I'm gonna rape that white bitch Leb style'?

What about David 'I'm innocent, no, really' Hicks' desire to kill all Jews?

Once again those romanticised as the 'other' get a free pass in order to demonstrate the supposed intellectual sophistication (ie amorality) of self-styled 'activists'.

I could say the same about you James McKenzie!

Sounds like you need to do some reading...

Dr Katrin Both said she did not accept the technique used to link Bradley Murdoch with the attack on Miss Lees and the alleged murder of her boyfriend Peter Falconio as a valid scientific method.

NT: British backpacker Peter Falconio was seen alive eight days after his alleged murder, a jury heard. Two petrol station workers told an Australian court that the missing 28-year-old visited the store, despite police saying he died 930 miles away.

Robert Brown believes Mr Falconio bought a chocolate bar and soda at the station in Bourke, northern Australia, on July 22, 2001.

But the man who 'killed'? British tourist Peter Falconio was not a crazed gunman, but a cunning, alert and meticulous person, a court has been told.

Accept for the fact that there is no evidence to suggest that he is even dead other than that he was not present at the trial of Bradley John Murdoch the man accused of his killing.

Prosecutor Rex Wild QC yesterday urged the jury to find Broome mechanic Bradley John Murdoch guilty of murdering Falconio, describing the alleged attack in the Northern Territory outback four years ago as premeditated.

Yet he has offered the court no evidence to suggest that Peter Falconio was even killed. No body no weapon and no time of death. Accept for Falconio's strange disappearance!

And his 'Wild' assumptions teeter on Noble Cause Corruption in the hope that anyone can be found guilty of this alleged crime so that the tourist dollars keep flowing in to the coffers, when any scapegoat will do!

The lonely-hearts club?

Wild could not offer a motive, other than that Murdoch may have spotted Mr Falconio's girlfriend Joanne Lees driving the couple's old orange Kombi alone up the remote Stuart Highway, while her boyfriend slept in the back.

Yet she was entwined in her boyfriend's life, having an affair with another man at the same time for the previous 5 years, and about to separate from him. So one would have to argue that both Peter and Lees had more of a motive than any accused stranger in the outback.

Hearsay and this credible police informant?

Bring on the informant...threaten him with jail and get him to say things that you would like him to suggest was true about the accused!

Murdoch was carrying 20 pounds of cannabis and a gun for protection - may have thought someone was following him and "dealt" with them, as he 'allegedly' told a friend in Broome after returning from the July 2001 drug-running journey, Mr Wild said.

Fits in with what the police say nicely? All very sinister though Mr Wild? His friend said? Question is how much did you offer his friend? Did you offer him remission? Immunity from prosecution for his crimes?

Wild: "Bradley Murdoch, 47, also carried a gun, his former drug trade partner James Hepi told the Darwin court."

Mmmm? Like I said, did Murdoch have 20 pounds of cannabis? Did he have a gun for protection? Was this evidence support by handing it up to the court? No! Therefore we have to arrive at that conclusion by assuming that the police could not resist offering the witness a deal that he could not refuse to verbal Murdoch, to get himself out of a jail sentence? At least that is a possibility.

Another possibility, sure he may have dealt in drugs or even carried a gun at some time or another but that does not mean that that was the case of the night of the alleged murder.

So you would not be putting that in the first evidence basket in the grand scheme of things, hey Mr Wild?

So no evidence was produced to suggest a gun had even been used yet wild is quick to suggest that there was a gun?

Defence lawyer Grant Algie

"There was no evidence a gun was even fired, saying no projectile was found and although the camper van was swabbed for gunshot residue, the swabs were never tested because there was nothing to suggest a gun had been fired," Defence lawyer Grant Algie.

So you just make it up?

Despite the massive police investigation launched after Mr Falconio disappeared, Mr Wild said the chances of finding the attacker were "very slim"

"If this was the action of some crazed gunman, he'd be found pretty quickly," he said.

"But this man is not a crazed gunman.

"This man is cunning, alert, and a practised driver, fit, awake with speed, able to move quickly and get away.

"But he's a fastidious man, as you know, and he's concerned to clear that crime scene as best he can, as quickly as he can."

But it seems unbelievable that a man who it was alleged had no compunction executing a man in cold blood using a handgun was not a crazed gunman? Don't you think grasshopper?

This is not a crazed gunman? Yet he suggested to the court that a man drove up behind the victim waved him down and shot him at point blank range in the head?

And it makes you wonder what the RTA call a good driver?

A learner on L's or P's? You certainly are not expected to practice now are you? The road is full of unpracticed drivers?

Or be fit in life? Who wants to be fit? Who wants to live longer? We should all be slobs so we're not accused of being able to commit extraordinary crimes because we're fit?

Therefore the suggestion that he was a practiced driver who was fit ought to be an outstanding compliment to any driver expected to hold a license. For the general safety of other road users.

Mr Wild said the alleged attacker covered a pool of Mr Falconio's blood on the highway with dirt, hid the couple's Kombi van in the scrub, and removed the Briton's body.

But human blood was found on the road where Peter Falconio was allegedly shot. DNA was extracted from that blood sample and used to identify Peter Falconio by comparing it with the DNA extracted from the Asthma "Puffer" identified as belonging to Mr Falconio, found at the scene of the crime. This comparison in itself does not prove that the blood is that of Peter Falconio - it only proves that these two blood samples are from the same person. Has the blood sample found on the road ever been compared directly with a known sample of Peter Falconio's blood/hair/tissue OR compared to his real parent's DNA for conclusive identification?

Why has the blood sample taken from the road been found to contain DNA from animals? Since no road kill animals were ever found at the crime scene, how did the animal contaminate blood get mixed with Peter Falconio's blood?

Was the purpose of mixing animal blood with human blood used to prove that a murder occurred at that particular place? It would be extremely difficult to demonstrate to police detectives that a shooting indeed took place but where no traces of blood were in evidence to corroborate such a story. A sufficiently adequate spillage of blood would be required to justify such a story. However, there appears to be a distinct lack of spillage of human blood at the crime scene so was the scene engineered to look like a shooting had taken place?

Mr Wild said the lynchpin of the prosecution case was the smear of blood - that matched Murdoch's DNA - found on the back of Ms Lees' t-shirt.

He said the DNA profile - 150 quadrillion times more likely to have come from Murdoch than someone else - was damning evidence.

"The Crown relies on the DNA which is found on that t-shirt as being the most single significant piece of evidence in this case," he said.

"It ties this man to this woman on this day."

DNA tests 'dangerous'

"DNA found on handcuffs used to tie up backpacker Joanne Lees was 100 million times more likely to have come from the defendant than anybody else were "dangerous" and "pushed science to the limits", a forensic expert, "said today.

Dr Katrin Both said she did not accept the technique used to link Bradley Murdoch with the attack on Miss Lees and the alleged murder of her boyfriend Peter Falconio as a valid scientific method.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005550743,00.html

150 quadrillion times?

What about 150 quadrillion, quadrillion million zillion times? Now that would have seemed a bit too far fetched aye! Sounds like that game we used to play at school to see who was the best exaggerator.

Mr Wild was delivering his closing statement to the jury in the Northern Territory Supreme Court trial into the alleged murder of Mr Falconio in July 2001.

Murdoch has pleaded not guilty to murder, and to assaulting Mr Falconio's girlfriend Ms Lees and depriving her of her liberty beside the outback Stuart Highway, near Barrow Creek.

Ridiculous suggestion?

Mr Wild rejected as "ridiculous" suggestions by Murdoch's defence team that the DNA may have got on the t-shirt either by primary or secondary transfer from a chair or wall at a takeaway chicken shop both Murdoch and the English couple both visited in Alice Springs on the same day.

"The Crown says that's the remotest possibility that has been discussed in this court," he said.

"Just to say it makes it sound ridiculous in my submission."

But it was only after Murdoch was arrested in SA on 'sex charges' that police, citing 'DNA evidence', alleged he was linked to the Falconio case???

To avoid further delays in having the murder case heard, Mr Prescott dismissed charges against Murdoch regarding firearms offences that were currently before the Adelaide court.

Bradley John Murdoch will face a court in Darwin tomorrow, charged for the first time over the murder of British tourist Peter Falconio.

An Adelaide magistrate today ordered Murdoch, 45, to be extradited to the Northern Territory where he will be formally charged with murdering Mr Falconio and attempting to abduct Mr Falconio's girlfriend, Joanne Lees.

Murdoch's extradition follows his acquittal earlier this week on 'unrelated sex charges' and his immediate rearrest.

Handcuffed and flanked by prison officers and Adelaide Magistrates Court staff, Murdoch showed no expression as Chief Magistrate Kelvyn Prescott dismissed arguments that his arrest was unlawful.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/13/1068674292650.html

He also reminded the jury that specialist testing found DNA consistent with Murdoch's on the gearstick of the couple's Kombi, and deep within the layers of cabletie restraints used to bind Ms Lees.

Mr Wild said if the police had wanted to plant evidence in the case, which has been suggested by Murdoch's lawyer, they would have "done a better job of it".

But the BIOLOGIST who testified in defence of Lindy Chamberlain at her murder trial has criticised forensic biologist Joy Kuhl's role in the Peter Falconio murder investigation.

Emeritus Professor Barry Boettcher, who retired as head of biological sciences at Newcastle University in 1993, failed to debunk Mrs Kuhl's crown evidence that foetal blood was found in the Chamberlains' car following the disappearance of baby Azaria.

Mrs Chamberlain was found guilty in 1982 but was later exonerated after Mrs Kuhl's evidence was found to be wrong.

Prof Boettcher has now locked horns again with Mrs Kuhl, 20 years later.

He has analysed a video tape of Mrs Kuhl's examination of the campervan Mr Falconio was driving on July 14 last year before he was apparently shot by a gunman north of Alice Springs.

The tape of Mrs Kuhl's and forensic officer Senior Constable Bill Towers' work was made by Alice Springs filmmaker Chris Tangey at a police compound soon after the tragic ambush.

Prof Boettcher found that a blood test applied to the driver's door appeared to reveal a partial handprint.

"Such a conclusion is a reasonable conclusion, but one that is not certain," Prof Boettcher said.

Mrs Kuhl is heard to say: "It can't be blood. I went right over that this afternoon."

"It is surprising that Mrs Kuhl and Bill Towers appeared not to show any interest in the brightest luminescence found during the taping of the tests on the Kombi," Prof Boettcher said of the potential handprint.

"Had they considered it to be a strong false positive reaction, I would have expected them to have chatted about such a strong false positive reaction rather than simply to have dismissed/ignored it.

"I conclude that the possible handprint luminescence on the driver's door of the Kombi was something that Mrs Kuhl and Bill Towers did not want to be brought to attention.

"The situation was one of a puzzling apparent murder, and since the investigators were taking unusual pains with the investigation, it seems inappropriate that the brightest luminescence result was dismissed in such an apparently casual manner."

Northern Territory Police Commander Col Hardman said at the time Mr Tangey made his tape public in February that the examination taped by Mr Tangey did not identify anything of additional forensic value.

Mt Tangey has submitted his tape and Prof Boettcher's comments to an independent review of the Falconio investigation.

Unsolved- Barrow Creek saga

http://www.personsmissing.com/barrowcreek4.html

DNA

DNA cannot be reliably dated and it could have got on Lees' shirt at almost any time before (secondary transfer at chicken shop), during (if Murdoch is Barrow Creek Bill) or after (police planting evidence or lab contamination) Falconio was allegedly murdered.

That's the real problem with forensic DNA, - especially trace DNA testing like LCN - it can only establish some sort of probable connection (though the 150 quadrillion to one match odds claimed here is a mathematical deceit that does not truthfully reflect the possibility of a chance match to Murdoch).

Wild's ridiculing of the secondary transfer hypothesis is completely without substance of course. It has been shown experimentally that secondary transfer of DNA can happen under circumstances very similar to those described and the dry heat you usually get out there would provide optimum conditions for the shedding of cells onto touched surfaces and the preservation of any DNA traces deposited.

It is no less likely than the secondary transfer that resulted in a rape victim's DNA being found on Jaidyn Leskie's clothes in the VFSC a couple of years back.

Perhaps Mr Wild would like to apply the same logic to the evidence of Peter Thatcher's DNA on the cable ties. Does this mean that the director of the NT forensic lab has also been linked to Lees "on this day"? If so, why isn't he in the dock with Murdoch?

DNA testing done 4 years
by Formic Acid Thursday December 15, 2005 at 07:49 AM

Evidently the DNA testing was carried out 4 years after the attack. Why wasn't the dna testing done straight after the event? It would have been more conclusive to have had the evidence DNA tested before the arrest of Murdoch and then cross matched with samples of Murdoch's DNA. Very convenient for the prosecution to have their suspect in custody and then carry out DNA testing. The chain of evidence procedure was flawed, no entries as to the movement of evidence, cross contamination etc. Good grounds for an appeal. "The court has heard testing four years after the July 2001 attack found the cable tie DNA was 100 million times more likely to have come from Murdoch than anyone else. But Mr Algie said it could be dangerous to place any weight on the DNA evidence because the handcuffs may have been contaminated with Murdoch's DNA, including on an "unbelievable journey" when police took the manacles to a meeting with Murdoch in Adelaide before a portion was sent to the UK for the DNA testing. " http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17474943-2,00.html

Related:

Lees' evidence proves Murdoch not guilty: lawyer

He said there was no evidence a gun was even fired, saying no projectile was found and although the camper van was swabbed for gunshot residue, the swabs were never tested because there was nothing to suggest a gun had been fired.

More: melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/100964.php

Murdoch nowhere near murder scene: defence

Closing submissions have begun in the trial of 47-year-old Bradley John Murdoch.

More: melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/12/100852.php

Expert baffled by Falconio evidence DNA contamination

The court also heard swabs taken from the back of the couple's Kombi van were not tested for gunshot residue because there was no evidence of a gun being used or a cartridge being found at the crime scene.

http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/11/99220.php

Outback DNA evidence 'contaminated'

During cross-examination by Grant Algie, defending, Ms Eckhoff said she did not know how his DNA came to be on the exhibit.

More: adelaide.indymedia.org/newswire/display_any/9340

Unfaithful Lees admits taking drugs, court told

NT: Key witness Joanne lees, has testified in the Northern Territory Supreme Court to smoking Marijuana on the night her boyfriend Peter Falconio went missing.

Yesterday she told the court how unfaithful she was to her boyfriend and that she'd even had an affair. But for some reason Lees wasn't a suspect in her own boyfriends killing?

More: http://www.geocities.com/publik18/archive05/2005d55.html

No Murder Weapon, No Body, No Place or Time of Death

NT: Joanne Lees ought to be the main suspect in this show trial. There is no body and no weapon to be found and Joanne Lees had a clear and present motive. She knew him, she travelled with him, she was unfaithful to him and she said that she was the last person to see him on the night she was stoned out of her head. So where does Bradley James Murdoch fit in?

More: http://www.geocities.com/publik18/archive05/2005d52.html

Trial of B J Murdoch

The trial of Bradley John Murdoch may be sensational - but for the wrong reason. This trial has had serious flaws in it - decide for yourself

Pride and Prejudice versus facts and truth. Trial of Bradley John Murdoch

More: http://www.melbourne.indymedia.org/news/2005/10/97709.php

Rex Wild QC: 150 quadrillion times more likely to have come from Murdoch?

Gotta admit I was disappointed by the speakers at yesterdays rally. The way it was advertised in the sms and emails gave the impression it was a response to the bullshit in Sydney. Instead we got endless rants about terrorism laws, the invasion of Iraq, David Hicks etc. I understand that this rally was organised before the events of last Sunday and so it's agenda was originally based on those issues but I think that should have changed. If anyone who was involved in organising the rally is reading this then listen and learn. You had a great opportunity here, hundreds if not thousands of people turned out, many more than you would have originally expected I'm sure, because of the strength of feeling about what happened in Cronulla and Maroubra etc. Almost all of your speakers failed to address this directly. It would have been fairly simple to do, just an acceptance that what people really wanted to say was that they were against tit for tat, racial violence and thuggery. You could have said something straight forward and strong about our objections to the suggestion that the violence has been carried out to defend us and our way of life, whoever we are on both sides. You had days to do it, hell, I could have whipped up a speech in half an hour that would have hit the mark. In the end it was almost dishonest of you. People wanting to show their disgust at the mob violence in Sydney more than anything end up being marched to the Liberal office to shout slogans about war and protest for the release of David Hicks!?!?! You had an opportunity to engage a much wider section of the community who would have completely agreed with you, who would have stood up with us in condemnation of the race riots, who would have shown a sense of unity we desperately need right now. But, given the amount of coverage the rally is getting in the mainstream media I'd say you pretty much blew it. Next time, keep it simple stupid.

How can anyone 'listen and learn' from such a stupid rant?

You didn't even organise your ideas into paragraphs.

It is you who must listen and learn.

quote:
=========
People wanting to show their disgust at the mob violence in Sydney more than anything end up being marched to the Liberal office to shout slogans about war and protest for the release of David Hicks!?!?!
==========

Are you suggesting that most Australians thinks its kosher to kidnap people off the streets and lock them away WITH NO CHARGES AND NO EVIDENCE?

Are you suggesting that most Australians can't see the link between our TERRORiSTS IN UNIFORM EXTERMINATING IRAQIS, and the NEED FOR THE MEDIA AND GOV TO INCITE ANTI-ARAB SENTIMENT?

Actually, the only issue repeatedly raised that was not directly relevant was industrial relations - a.k.a. - the war against unions.

what are you stupid?

You can't understand english unless it is organised into paragraphs? I didn't use paragraphs so my entire point is null and void? Whatever dick. So what makes it a stupid rant? In my opinion it was a wasted opportunity. They had more people there than they could have wildly hoped for had it not been for the shit in Cronulla and instead of concentrating on the central issue for most people who went (racist riots) and carefully introducing other related issues and showing the connection between them we got virtually nothing but civil rights issues with only passing comments on why people were actually there. I know a few people who were a bit disappointed and won't be doing something like this again in a hurry because they felt their presence was being manipulated into support for something else. It's about the riots and preventing them from growing, ya moron, and if you need paragraphs to understand that then you're not thinking hard enough.

And one more thing, where in god's multitude of names did I even hint that I thought it was kosher to kidnap people with no evidence or that Australians can't see the link between the war on terror and anti-arab sentiment? Pray tell? Nice straw man numbnut.

Yes, a wasted effort Morgz, including your own response. They're not interested. They're only interested in ALL CAPSing the same old slogans and catch-phrases that have been bobbing around here for a while.

It's not even particularly funny anymore.

Now the first person to see the 'war' in Howard, I give them some credit, even (but to a lesser extent) the person who first substituted 'C' for 'H' in his name.

[I used paragraphs, but didn't indent. Is that okay?]

Hi morgz,

Take your blinkers off.

The issue is highly related to the war to David Hicks and to all those issues those people were protesting about.

You cannot celebrate victory if you don't tackle the root cause.

You want the easyway out, so just take it?

You cannot tackle the problem of racism here unless you first deal with the root cause!

Jay - the fact that you are more interested in style than substance kinda says it all...

IN CASE YOU DIDN'T KNOW, lower-case letters are a relatively new invention.
===========================

You know, after the election of the Howard government, I visited ZionMC and asked:

HOW MANY AUSTRALIANS SHOULD DIE AS A CONSEQUENCE OF ELECTING A MAN WHO EXTERMINATES ARABS FOR FUN AND PROFIT?

I also asked:

WHAT METHOD OF EXTERMINATION WOULD BE MOST APPROPRIATE FOR JOHN HOWARD?

Similar statements in coversation led to the arrest of TERRORIST SUSPECTS.

BUT I HAVEN"T BEEN ARRESTED, BECAUSE I AM NOT AN ARAB.

" BUT I HAVEN"T BEEN ARRESTED, BECAUSE I AM NOT AN ARAB."
Hmmm... The way things are going I wouldn't push your luck.

As for the anti-war stuff... The rally actually was organised as an anti-war rally and a lot of the participants (including me) were already planning to come to it for that reason. The Cronulla thing just made it all the more urgent. I diddn't speak to a single person there who couldn't see the link between the war and racism and I noticed that all the anti-war or anti-terror-law speaches got huge cheers from the crowd. One speaker at the end made the particularly good point that EVERY time Australia has been involved in a war there have been race riots sparked by that involvement.

I must take responsibility for the rather dull witted rant about Murdoch which almost hijacked this thrwad. I apologise for using him as an exampl eof a non-Middle Eastern criminal who showed no remorse.

Even though it is a very valid one.

Thankyou to those who treated Peter Falconio's drivel withthe contempt it deserved by totally ignoring it and getting back on topic.

Terrific letter in today's Australian:

SORRY to jump all over the feel-good cheer of those going to the trouble of marching against racism, but this Scrooge can't allow these "silly old/young buggers" (apologies to Bob Hawke) off lightly. Marching against racism is fatuous. Other than a few white supremacists, who everyone knows are nutters, who would say they were pro-racism? What a stupid, self-evident thing to waste your time with. I guess the same protesters will next stand up and be counted for their opposition to evil. I can only presume it helps them feel smug and morally superior.

Steve Atkins
Berowra Heights, NSW

Of course Nazihunter's real agenda is that he is happy to collaborate with Nazis, even when they attack other Jews, because it helps to further his Zionist and anti-Arab agenda.