DIVERSITY: Centre for Independent Studies hosts genetics expert ...

As part of its Big Ideas Forum this year, the Centre for Independent Studies is hosting German Thilo Sarrazin, a German former banker and politician who claims Muslims are lowering German intelligence and that all Jews share certain genes.

Lovely. Janet Albrechtsen will also be sharing the podium. You can read a gushing tribute to Sarrazin in The Australian authored by Oliver Marc Hartwich, a research fellow at the CIS. Hartwich believes that Sarazzin is the victim of German political correctness.

Heck, why shouldn't a German, less than a century after the Holocaust, claim that Jews have shared features that are inherited? Why shouldn't the CIS be allowed to host someone with such rabid views? And why shouldn't those sponsoring the CIS, among them some major Australian corporations that supply goods and services to Jews and Muslims, not be able to finance the promotion of such opinions?

And why shouldn't I and my Jewish friends be allowed to name and shame these corporations? It's a free country.

CRIKEY: NSW election: the ethnic vote battle that is Lakemba

With the NSW election coming up on March 26, there will no doubt be plenty of attention paid to the so-called ethnic vote. And with even safe ALP seats up for grabs as O’Farrell’s barrel of promises rolls across western Sydney, ethnic organisations will use the opportunity to promise votes. For a price, of course.


In Lakemba, things aren’t exactly promising for the Libs. Although the Liberal candidate for Lakembasecured a two-party preferred swing of some 13% in the 2008 byelection, it remains rock-solid Labor. The only problem is that an outsider wouldn’t be sure who the ALP candidate actually was. Sitting MP Robert Furolo for some reason has omitted words such as  ALP and Labor from his posters. Unlike last time ...

Lakemba isn’t a popular place in some circles. Dr Jeremy Sammut, a Research Fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies, sees Lakemba as an example of the "M&M" problem of "disintegration". Sammut claims that "Lakemba and its surrounds ... remain ghettofied ... [with] jarring realities on the disintegration of some parts of Sydney from the mainstream, and the failure to repeat the successful patterns of integration of other ethnic groups".


And presumably ghetto-dwellers presumably vote the same way, obeying the dictates of their leaders. Enter the Lebanese Moslems Association (LMA), which manages the Imam Ali ben Abi Taleb mosque on Haldon Street, the largest of around 10 mosques in the seat and where Sheik Hilaly often leads the service.


In the 1995 state election, which then Premier John Fahey lost of Labor’s Bob Carr, Hilaly openly backed Michael Hawatt, then (and indeed now) the Liberal candidate. Hilaly’s voice could be heard on a loudspeaker stuck to the roof of a station wagon telling voters in chaste Arabic how to vote for Hawatt. A few days before the ballot, a host of Fahey ministers were at the Lakemba library showing their support for Hilaly’s campaign. And all to no avail. Tony Stewart easily defeated Hawatt, and Carr managed to knock off Fahey.

The LMA is also no stranger to politics. It was often involved in branch stacks on behalf of competing ALP factions. Back in the 1990s when Tony Stewart competed with former premier Morris Iemma for the Lakemba preselection, a former LMA president and local solicitor allowed his office to be used as a base for a dummy branch set up to support one of the factions.


In the 2001 Auburn byelection, whose ballot was held on the Saturday before the 9/11 attacks, Liberal leader Kerry Chikarovski sought endorsement for her candidate in Auburn from Hilaly and the LMA. She got it. The Liberal candidate obtained a primary swing of less than 1% in a ballot with no compulsory preferencing. Scott Morrison was campaign manager and state director.


Just how representative is the LMA anyway? Last time I checked, the LMA excluded over 50% of voters by not allowing women to be full members. Then again, "mainstream" Australian organisations such as the Melbourne Club are also happy to only have chicks working in the kitchen.


And like the Melbourne Club, the LMA is becoming a bastion of Liberal Party activism, throwing its support behind a swag of Liberal candidates, among them Michael Hawatt in Lakemba. Personally I think this is a politically inept move for any community organisation, but then again I’m probably one of those ghettofied M&M types.


The Libs shouldn’t fall into the trap of accepting ridiculous claims by community organisations of delivering votes. People don’t vote because of some alleged ethnic or organisational affiliation. People vote because their parents voted a certain way or because they like the candidate or for some other reason usually divorced from race or religion. And they hardly ever vote a certain way because their imam tells them to.


And that makes the LMA’s reported move of endorsing candidates completely futile. Still, at least this time around they’re backing a party and not some Muslim-only ticket as their senior imam did recently.


Words © 2010 Irfan Yusuf



Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT: Jeremy Sammut tries to be a smartie on M&M's

Jeremy Sammut is a research fellow at the Centre for Independent Studies. He has a PhD in Australian social and political history from Monash University. He has written about child protection laws and health policy.

And now he is writing about what he describes as the 'M&M' debate. M&M equals "multiculturalism and Muslims". His article appearing on the CIS website has been reprinted on the opinion page of The Australian.

Sammut writes about the “multicultural industry” which seeks to stifle “a legitimate debate about the success or otherwise of Muslim integration”.

Sammut's evidence is one part of Sydney he describes as "Lakemba and its surrounds" which he argues

... remain ghettofied.


The usual pattern of dispersal by first-generation children of immigrants has not occurred to the same extent and the area is plagued with poor educational achievement, high unemployment and crime.


The community concerns that exist in western Sydney about Muslims and multiculturalism are based on these jarring realities on the disintegration of some parts of Sydney from the mainstream, and the failure to repeat the successful patterns of integration of other ethnic groups.

All this raises a few issues. Well, actually more than a few. I'll list some:

[01] Was Jeremy Sammut around when many used to refer to Cabramatta as 'Vietnamatta'? Was he aware of the large number of media reports and conservative commentators talking about 'Asian crime gangs' and the difficulties 'Asians' faced integrating?

[02] Is Sammut talking about Muslims as a race?

[03] Is Sammut asking us to believe that a certain ethnic group of Muslims in Lakemba is reflective of all Muslims across the country?

[04] Sammut argues that ...

It is because most Australians believe in the immigration and integration of all comers that what is going on in southwest Sydney is of concern.


Perceptive politicians have picked up on this.

Could he name some of these perceptive politicians? Does he agree with their perceptions and statements?

I might ask him these questions direct.

COMMENT: Noooooooooooooooooooooo Fatso's

I’m sure readers will remember that show National Bingo Night. Readers of South Asian heritage will have particularly fond memories of the Bingo Commissioner who kicked so many goals for their ancestral culture in Australia with this classic performance.



How could we ever not forget?

Dr Tanveer Ahmed had more than just failed TV game shows in his comedic repertoire. Indeed, perhaps his best comic performance has been convincing the neo-Conservative Centre for Independent Studies (CIS) that he is also an eminently qualified to be appointed a visiting fellow with research interests in:

… Islamic affairs, South Asia and the health sector.

Ahmed’s expertise in and contributions to psychiatry are well documented. His latest contribution to Islamic affairs (whatever that phrase means) consists of a review of the book by yours truly, published in the Spring 2009 edition of Policy magazine published by the CIS.

Normally I wouldn’t waste $9.95 on this allegedly intellectual magazine. However, it had one of my all-time favourite writers - PJ O’Rourke - on the cover. Yet as I found out after I had parted with my cash, all they had from PJ was an interview he did with some bloke who does a radio show on Radio National. I could have just as easily read the same interview online on the ABC website for free! Indeed, I had already downloaded the podcast back in May!!

Anyway, Ahmed’s review makes interesting reading for his complete objectivity. He sticks to the issues. He avoids making personal attacks. He’s not interested in innuendo. Consider this paragraph:

Yusuf also fits the profile of those vulnerable to radicalisation in other ways, for it is the socially awkward who are most likely to turn to Islamist teachings for a sense of social connectedness, in much the same way that other disaffected adolescents may become punks or Goths. Yusuf writes of being bullied because of the colour of his skin while in primary school. He is also obese. In a recent New York Times op-ed piece, an Iranian blogger captured it beautifully when he describes the religious police as ‘those young men least likely to ever attract the opposite sex but then find the government tells them they are special and gives them guns to prove it.’

Ahmed continues with this prediction:

Yusuf will remain controversial and disliked by many, including some Muslims.

Yes, I am disliked by the likes of Keysar Trad, Andrew Bolt, Mark Steyn, Daniel Pipes, Tim Blair and Tanveer Ahmed. The latter two seem to relish making references to my physique. It is true. I am fat. Still, my message to them is ...


And for some ailments there is NOOOOOOOOOOOO cure. Not even if you are a medical practitioner.

UPDATE I: Speaking of Daniel Pipes, Ahmed's review describes Pipes as a "US Middle East expert". Ahmed famously shared the podium with Pipes arguing the proposition that Islam and democracy are incompatible. To argue that Islam and democracy are incompatible implies that Muslims cannot live as productive citizens in a democracy. Given that Pipes seems to believe that Barack Obama was (and possibly still is) a Muslim, one wonders how Pipes can explain a current or former Muslim now becoming President of arguably the world's most successful democracy.

UPDATE II: An interesting discussion on Tanveer's review can be found at the blog of Policy editor Andrew Norton here.

Words © 2009 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT: Daniel and Gabby weep. Let's celebrate!

After predicting Barack Obama would go down a similar electoral path as former US Presidential candidate George McGovern, a dispondent Daniel Pipes writes this postscript on November 5:

Well, this prediction was badly wrong. To explain it away, I could point to the fall's financial problems, the media's bias, or to the McCain campaign's many errors, but there's a deeper issue here. I had confidence that the American people would reject Obama when they learned about his extremist political views, dubious associations, and biographical mysteries. I am astonished that these problems hardly registered, I feel bewildered by my own country, and apprehensive by what comes next.

A comment was left by "Gabby from australia" who compares Obama to Hitler and Stalin:

Hi I am Gabby from Australia here. I have been coming daily to this website for many years and i think that your usual ability to accurately predict outcomes and trends is still very accurate. I believe in you, absolutely ...

Pffffft. She continues:

Remember ww2? Hitler was the same type, a cult of personality and slick propaganda of goebbels, Stalin, Lenin, they all lied didn't they and gullible people still followedd them, the ends justifies the means. Anyone remember how they rise to power ended up? I do.

God help America under Obama.

God help Gabby! Continuing:

Obama-he admits his brothers and sisters all are muslims, yet he admits his dad and step dad was muslim. Yet, still he persisted and continued to persist with the lie he was not amuslim nor ever was which is orwellian in the extreme of denialibility. "plausible or believable deniability". Majority of his borhters and sisters are still in poverty in Kenya.

If you tell a lie often enough it will be told as fact. You just need to read read about the koran to know its all lies. "War is deceit muhammad said". Well America is at war, and teh greatest liar has been elected. Indeed , War is deceit.

His cousin ODINGA in Kenya he gave a million dollars to and helped advise and electioneer for "cuz"odinga is a rabid jihadst whom has forced shariah law on the population of 90 per cent non muslims in that land. The rest of his kenyan family celebrated his victory as "obama is a son of kenya" son indeed, he was born in Kenya in front of his black african kenyan muslim grandmother who admitted it during a telephone call to a certain Bishop. His family still are por in kenya, I wonder with bro obama as president how many free citzenships will he hand out- ODinga? his brothers and sisters aunties uncles, why stop there. Let the whole fricken tribe in. Bet he will.

I'm sorry. My sides are splitting and I have other stuff to write. You can read the rest of Gabby's rant here. You can even add your own comment. But just remember this golden rule:

Comments are screened for relevance, substance, and tone, and in some cases edited, before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome, but comments are rejected if scurrilous, off-topic, vulgar, ad hominem, or otherwise viewed as inappropriate.

If you want to see Daniel Pipes in person, watch out for his next Australian tour, perhaps again sponsored by AIJAC and/or the Centre for Independent Studies.

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

MEDIA: Exposing the new anti-Semitism ...

The US-based Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) has just released a detailed report on 12 pundits engaging in the smearing of a Semitic faith and its (often deemed but not actual) followers. The report is entitled Smearcasting and can be downloaded here.

The report oozes with detail and is fully-referenced, making it almost impossible for those profiled to bully the authors with threats of libel or defamation action.

Predictably, some of the dozen pundits profiled are associated with FoxNews. Strangely enough, others are regularly invited by prominent Australian thinktanks such as the Centre for Independent Studies and the Australia-Israel Jewish Affairs Committee (AIJAC) to speak in Australia. Among them is Mark Steyn, whose last tour was partly funded by the Federal Government. Here is what Steyn wrote in his America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It ...

The Serbs figured that out -as other Continentals will in the years ahead: If you can’toutbreed the enemy, cull ‘em. The problem that Europe faces is that Bosnia’s demographic profile is now the model for the entire continent.

AIJAC has led anti-racism campaigns against Pauline Hanson's One Nation party. The CIS and IPA promote individual liberty and freedom. One can only wonder what the heads of these thinktanks were thinking when choosing to invite persons who encourage the kind of thinking that treats 1.2 billion individuals across the world (including 360,000 in Australia) not as individuals but as members of a group to be singled out as hostile.

It's interesting that columnist Andrew Bolt described Steyn as "a formidable advocate for good sense". Then again, Bolt made these comments in the context of criticising the Howard government's funding of Steyn's visit. You can read Steyn's hsterical approach to European demography in his lecture to the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs here.

It will be interesting to see if the CIS and AIJAC will again invite writers who seem to regard genocide as an option for Europe and who openly promote the kind of fear-mongering and prejudice common across the Western world in the decades leading upto the Holocaust. It will also be interesting to see if the Department of Immigration & Citizenship will provide visas for hate-mongers to visit Australia on speaking tours, and whether the Australian government will provide funding for such tours.

One author of the report has recently written about the distribution of the DVD Obsession in key "swing states" in the lead-up to the US election.

We are living in sad times when mainstream conservatives are promoting sectarian and racist nonsense.

UPDATE I: Speaking of nonsense, a certain Queenslander of dubious employment status has posted this dissertation on "the level of Muhammedan infiltration in Australian Immigration offices". But for true nuttiness, visit the top right-hand corner of the blog of Shukh Yer'mami (literally "urinate all over your mother", which might explain what SY's father was doing when SY was conceived) where, on October 9, the Shukh placed this imbecilic poll ...

If Obama gets in, will he destroy Israel?

° Obama will destroy Israel & America
° Obama will destroy Pakistan
° Obama will nuke Mecca
° Obama will make the US Islamic
° Obama means peace in our time

The majority of voters support the first and fourth options. And if that isn't crazy enough, read the Shukh's defence of former Austrian Hitler-admirer Joerg Haider. Priceless!

Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

CRIKEY: Karadzic v Guantanamo Bay detainees: two very different trials...

Salim Hamdan, Osama bin Laden's driver, has just been found guilty of war crimes at a military tribunal held at Guantanamo Bay. He could face life imprisonment after a jury of six US military officers selected by the Pentagon found he had transported two surface-to-air missiles in his car which would be used against US forces during their invasion of Afghanistan.

Prosecutor Colonel Laurence Morris was quoted as saying: "We are confident that we can try cases to the highest standards of justice."

Justice? What kind of justice? Did Hamdan have access to all the evidence used to try him? Who was this evidence obtained from? How was it obtained?

In his recently published book, Torture Team: Deception, Cruelty and the Compromise of Law, international law professor Phillipe Sands QC exposes unethical Defense Department lawyers joining forces with neo-conservative politicians to produce the Acton Memo. This document, signed by Donald Rumsfeld on 2 December 2002, enabled interrogators at Guantanamo Bay (and later at Abu Ghraib) to lawfully commit acts of torture in violation of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.

Only a week ago, al-Jazeera cameraman Sami al-Hajj was released after over six years at the Guantanamo facility. Canadian citizen Omar Khadr, first detained at age 16, remains in custody. He wasn't the only prisoner sent to Guantanamo as a minor. This 2006 list of detainees shows a number aged in the early 20s who must have been minors when they first arrived at Guantanamo.

Compare this to the procedures used to detain and try Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic, who led the 1990s war in Bosnia that resulted in the slaughter of thousands of Bosnians of all denominations and that included the establishment of concentration camps and gang-rape of tens of thousands of women. In the town of Srebrenica alone, over 7,000 men and boys were slaughtered.

Karadzic is being tried by a UN War Crimes Tribunal. There have been no suggestions of torture at this tribunal. None of the evidence will be withheld from Karadzic, and he will be free to engage lawyers if he wishes. Compared to the cages in which many Guantanamo detainees (including David Hicks) were kept, Karadzic's prison cell looks more like a 5-star hotel.

At its recent Big Ideas Forum, the Centre for Independent Studies asked five prominent speakers to talk about "Protecting the Legacy of Freedom: The Ideas of The Enlightenment in the 21st Century".

Not a single speaker mentioned the Guantanamo gulag or Radovan Karadzic. Sitting through that spectacle of self-congratulatory pomposity, I couldn't help but think of Mahatma Gandhi's response when asked what he thought of Western civilisation: "I think it would be a good idea".

We live in a world where terror suspects are kept in secret prisons and gulags and tried by military commissions, while war criminals are afforded civilised treatment and a fair trial. Perhaps Gandhi was right all along ...

First published in the Crikey daily alert for Thursday 7 August 2008.

COMMENT: Making commercial law sound enlightening ...

It’s difficult to make a lecture on legal history sound interesting and entertaining. It’s even more difficult to imagine a judge successfully doing this.

His Honour Justice Spigelman, Chief Justice of the NSW Supreme Court, managed to comfortably achieve this requirement. His presentation to the Enlightenment Forum organised by the Centre for Independent Studies was a master-stroke of clarity, erudition and good humour.

His Honour focused on the enlightenment value that seeks to implement a culture of improvement through the application of reason. He said that no individual or society should be deemed sentenced by the Creator to remain at the same standard.

Spigelman J distinguished between reform and improvement. He illustrated his discussion by examining the life of one of England’s foremost jurists, Lord Mansfield.

English enlightenment was a more pragmatic affair than its counterparts in other parts of Europe. It focussed more on what works than on how the world should be. It was realistic, but at times too insular.

Lord Mansfield was an apparently rare entity - a Scottish Francophone. He didn’t share the insularity of the common lawyers of his day, especially in commercial matters. In his 30 year career, he developed English common law (especially in the area of property, insurance, commercial instruments and maritime law) in a manner that made English law consistent with developments in other parts of the world. He insisted that there must be freedom of contract and that contracts should be based on good faith.

Mansfield was in many ways a man ahead of his time. Many of the issues he addressed in his judgments – issues of delays and mounting costs to litigants - are still relevant today. Mansfield also was happy to refer commercial disputes to independent arbitrators. He was an interventionist judge, happy to actively participate in hearings as opposed to just leaving matters to the parties and/or their legal counsel. Indeed, many aspects of modern judicial practice (such as case management) can be traced back to Mansfield’s enlightened reforms. In this sense, Mansfield ensured that the values of enlightenment are entrenched in contemporary judicial practice.

Spigelman J cited an American judge Posner who once said that the law is the only discipline in which innovation is regarded as a pejorative concept. Lawyers prefer to speak of improvement as opposed to innovation. Yet Mansfield’s role in developing English commercial law represented both innovation and improvement.

The last time I read about Lord Mansfield was when I studied an undergraduate course in commercial law under Professor Mark Cooray. At the time, I found the entire development of the Sale of Goods Act rather boring. Spigelman J’s lecture might just revive an interest in the topic again.

EVENT: CIS Acton Lecture - Fr Robert Sirico

Readers of this blog (all 3 of you) will by now have realised that I take some interest in issues of religion and its relationship with politics. So you can bet your backsided dollar that I'll be investing $22 plus transport costs in going to this event hosted by the Centre for Independent Studies. It's to be held on Monday 21 July 2008 in Sydney.






The topic is "Must Religion be a Threat to Liberty?". It should be an interesting event.


Words © 2008 Irfan Yusuf

EVENT: Learning liberty ...

OK, I admit I bag the Centre for Independent Studies from time to time. But one excellent initiative they put on is the Liberty & Society conference, a weekend program in which they invite young students and professionals to learn about classical and neo-classical liberalism.

I attended one of these conferences some years back, and I still have the notes. You may not agree with the CIS's take on everything, but this course really gives you something to think about.

More importantly, you get to meet some awesome intellects. I remember meeting these 2 rather funky individuals named Suri Ratnapala and the distinguished political scientist Chandran Kukathas (whose paper on multiculturalism should be required reading for anyone with an interest on the subject). One of these guys apparently got away with being the only dude to teach women's studies at an Australian university. Quite an achievement!

I strongly recommend this course to anyone who wishes to learn more about liberty.

© Irfan Yusuf 2007


Bookmark this on Delicious

CRIKEY: Talking Turkey, democracy and EU membership

Turks have just elected an Islamist government. But we aren't talking about HAMAS here. Turkey’s Islamists combine free market economics, recognition of Israel, pro-Western foreign policy and more zeal to join the EU than any of its more allegedly secular predecessors.

Still, many conservatives (both social and economic) oppose Turkey’s entry into the EU. I saw this in action back in October 2005 at the launch of the Australian edition of In Defence of Global Capital published by the CIS.

The author is an ex-greenie ex-socialist Swede, Johan Norberg, who converted to capitalism after researching ways to fight global poverty. He now believes globalised capitalism, removing trade barriers and liberalising international labour markets is essential to solving intractable economic, social, environmental and security problems.

Paul Kelly from The Oz and James Morrow (whose Investigate magazine’s Australian edition seems to have gone underground, if not under) introduced Norberg with all smiles and praise. One even praised him for his good looks!

Norberg lapped it up before telling us to open our borders to new goods, services, people and money. He attacked the EU’s rhetoric on globalisation and its hypocrisy in placing high tariff walls to stop imports from the third world.

I noticed a slight change in tone from Kelly, Morrow and the audience when Norberg said the West should liberalise their immigration policies and acknowledge that the greatest achievements and contributions in culture, business and politics often come from migrants and refugees.

I couldn’t help myself. In question time, I asked whether Norberg supported EU membership for Turkey. To the chagrin of his conservative Sydney audience, Norberg went on to explain why arguments EU conservatives use to oppose Turkey’s entry are in fact excellent reasons to support it:

1. Turkey is too big and will make up 15% of the EU’s population. True, but size represents opportunities, especially given Turkey’s growing economy.

2. Turkey is too poor. True, but many recent entrants are poorer and will prove a greater drain. Plus poor Europeans often do the jobs that rich Europeans refuse to do.

3. Turkey is too Muslim. Norberg said that not all Muslims are the same. Some of Europe’s more troublesome Muslim migrants are victims of overly generous welfare policies and inflexible and overly regulated labour markets. A fresh injection of Westernised Turkish Muslims will help the process of economic and social integration for (often less integrated) South Asian and North African ethnic Muslim groups.

Further, if the EU strings Turkey along with all these promises of membership if Turkey reforms its economy and polity, then dumps Turkey just for some historical and religious prejudice, it will damage the EU more than Turkey.

Norberg wasn’t exactly the most popular person in the room after all that. My notes show Paddy McGuinness almost choking on his wine, then arguing profusely about the hordes of German and French Muslims rioting, and Norberg responding by saying it was more complex than just culture and sect.

It seemed my Turkey-EU question let the kebab out of the bag. It was hilarious to see this allegedly conservative crowd push their free market economics out the window to make way for their pet sectarian prejudices.

First published in the Crikey daily alert on 25 July 2007.

Words © 2007 Irfan Yusuf


Bookmark this on Delicious

COMMENT: Jill Singer exposes Steyn's lies

Well, it seems you don’t have to be a left wing Jew or a right wing Muslim to find the “hate speech” (his words, not mine) of Canadian-born racist Mark Steyn disturbing.

Writing in the Herald-Sun, Wakely-award-winning journalist Jill Singer expressed her dismay (if not disgust) with Steyn’s attempts to demonise anyone deemed Muslim. And that was even after Steyn’s diatribe was “modified for ABC audiences”.

Steyn used the podium of Australian right-wing think tanks to spread a simple message. Singer sumarised that message as follows:

… that Islam has nothing to offer the world but destruction … In Steyn's world, Muslims are the legitimate target of jokes and calls for obliteration.

Alleged conservatives are lapping up this message of extreme intolerance. The CIS continues to triumphantly boast of the “sell-out” session at the Conservatorium earlier this month.

Of course, no one from the CIS or the IPA has publicly distanced themselves from Steyn’s anti-Muslim diatribe. Steyn’s offensive descriptions of the cultures and religions of Muslim Aussies doesn’t seem to have perturbed these alleged conservatives.

Yet why should the now-geriatric members of Australia’s old “New Right” regard Muslim-bashing as unacceptable? As Singer notes:

Predictably enough, Steyn was given a warm welcome by the Right on his highly publicised tour of Australia, including the likes of our PM, Treasurer and Foreign Minister.

One can only assume its because they like what he has to say, but are not game to say it themselves.

Perhaps most interesting was Singer’s exposure of blatant lies told by Steyn in his quest to generate maximum hatred toward anyone deemed Muslim.

… the reefer-jacketed school drop-out is not impeded by small matters, such as factual accuracy, when labouring to slag off at Muslims whenever possible.

An example: during our interview, he repeated something he had written about the Swedish city of Malmo, to the effect it was on the path to ruination because 40 per cent of its population was now Muslim. A listener texted in to say this figure was exaggerated. With eyes flashing, Steyn stuck to his guns.

Curious about his twitchy reaction, I later contacted Sweden's official statistics department to check his alleged source, which was a furphy.

Steyn's writings on Malmo's social problems (which need no exaggeration) also state that ambulance drivers refuse to go into many areas of the city because of the danger posed by Muslims.

His source for this appears to be a two-year-old report on Fox News, except where Fox reported Malmo's Muslim population at being 25 per cent, Steyn inflated it to 40 per
cent.

And where Fox reported that ambulance drivers would not go into some areas of Malmo without a police escort, Steyn changed it to many areas.

Imagine CIS staff explaining this to the Australian CEO of the National Australia Bank. Or perhaps them using this in their next funding or sponsorship from Crazy Johns.

And to think this sort of nonsense was being promoted at a “Big Ideas Forum”.