Karnal wrote on May 9
th, 2016 at 1:01pm:
freediver wrote on May 9
th, 2016 at 12:40pm:
Are we allowed to discriminate on the basis of political ideology?
Alas, FD, the people voted on that in the referendum to ban the Communist Party.
The answer was a resounding no.
I don't think discrimination on the basis of political ideology in immigration policy would require us to ban any political parties Karnal. Would could call it a character test. If someone is ideologically opposed to freedom and democracy, they are of unsound character.
How does our banning of terrorist organisations get around this issue?
polite_gandalf wrote on May 9
th, 2016 at 2:17pm:
freediver wrote on May 9
th, 2016 at 12:40pm:
It is true. It is on the wiki.
Quote me.
No problem. It is on the wiki after all.
polite_gandalf wrote on May 7
th, 2016 at 4:30pm:
freediver wrote on May 7
th, 2016 at 1:38pm:
You deflected Gandalf. You have not said whether you think it is racist. Kind of hypocritical don't you think given your eagerness to see racism in every criticism of Islam?
Short answer then, I don't consider "arabia for arabs" as "blatant racism". Of course it could be racist depending on the context in which it is used. But the context Aussie used is clearly that of the Israeli annexation and forceful eviction of the inhabitants. Objecting to that is not racist by any stretch.
I'll take your refusal to answer where Aussie said "ethnic cleansing is the solution" - as yet another case of you making crap up.
The "context" Gandalf refers to includes a video clip from Lawrence of Arabia that Aussie posted so we could tell what Arabs look like. Ironically, from what I could tell, most of the actors were Europeans with a bit of careful selection and a lot of makeup and fancy dress.