I must admit I don't see that it matter because Oz benefited from the event.

England was invaded in 1066 by the Normans ( but you don't here them whinging about it all the time), it introduced diversity and made it a better place in the long run.

You cannot apply standards that apply today to what happened hundreds of years ago because you have to apply standard that apply at the time the event occurs.
It would be different if it happened today but we are talking about history.

No injustice to recognise

Britain came, kicked some ass and took over

End of

Colonisation rocked

It will almost certainly happen to the west in the next couple of hundred years.... All empires fall eventually..... Not from Islam either, more like China/India.....Albeit far more stealth like.

Same rule applies ?

We are actually being colonised right now.... Check out London and the white flight..... and then the centers of Melbourne and Sydney..... the politics here will come later. It's natural attrition.

Yep. That's what happens over time. It certainly could be the case.

Blimey for once I kind of agree ....


We are actually being colonised right now.... Check out London and the white flight..... and then the centers of Melbourne and Sydney..... the politics here will come later. It's natural attrition...

Its the way it goes. People move, breed and colonise.

I guess it does

Thing is the host populations of the west, silenced up until now by the left, are starting to take notice and push back - you see this with the rise of Pegida, Trump, Wilders, UKIP etc. And the difference to days gone past is that the host populations have the means and intelligence to resist........

The left and their 3rd world/islamic masters have made their move too early

It's not going to be pretty

If you dont recognise that China and India will be the worlds major players in the next century then you've got the foresight of King Canute. I think I read somewhere that the largest group of Migrants in Aus... overtaking all other migrant numbers combined will be Indians within the next 10 years.

Islam and the Middle east are it's own worst enemy when it comes to power, it is destined to implode... yet again.

We are being blindsided by India of all countries.... not seeing them coming up the political, social and geo power ladder.... probably could be a lot worse masters out there.

I've had a few Indian bosses in my time. I can tell you its not good. Would take a Chinese one any day of the week.

You're getting confused by 2 separate issues - the rise of Asia and immigration into the west

Where immigrants integrate and assimilate, it will be a success. Most Chinese and Indians do. Most muslims do not

Where multiculturalism has been the policy, failure has been the general outcome - you see this with islamic communities in Europe

The Chinese and Indians like what they see in Australia - an open free market economy with rule of law, low corruption and a clean environment. Many muslims do not and in fact detest democracy and equal rights for all

China and India will of course continue to grow. Australia will remain a western nation in Asia - changing of course but getting wealthier and still basically the same as today

Hope this helps

Glad you think that. So you or your forbearers will be perfectly understanding when your ass is kicked out of OZ/


Colonisation certainly rocks/especially when by default.

I'm missing something, why would Zulu be kicked out? As far as I'm aware he didn't colonise anywhere.

Another bizarre and incomprehensible statement

Total and utter crap ! I cant believe that you believe that
.

This ISIS mob and the western medias reaction has got you totally freaked out hasn't it.

So Curry, Pizza, Souvlaki and Yum Cha are ok and Kebabs and Falfels are not.... Because at the end of the day, when all is said and done, that's what it comes down to..... thats integration on the high street.

Or put another way... Hindi Temples, Othodox Church and Bhuddist Shrines are fine, but Mosques are evil ..... Your kidding aren't you. Sari's are in and Muslim headdress is out.... What a weird way of thinking.

Interesting to see the usual entrenched views on this issue i.e. invaded or settled (although it's moved to it's usual anti-all Islam).

As one of the few posters born in Australia and who studied Australian history at school and university (2 years taught by Prof Geoffrey Blainey, one of Australia's most eminent historians and authors) I would make the following points:

1 Why did Captain James Cook not follow customary and maritime law at the time and instructions from his masters to negotiate a treaty with any indigenous people he encountered? (I'll answer my own question - Cook said he encountered savages and they were not entitled to a treaty).

2 Why did they resort to the legal lie and patently untrue idea that the land was 'terra nullius' (belonging to nobody)?

3 Invasion deniers are looking for an army and battles (such as Hastings) which didn't happen. The 'invasion' was at the micro level and widespread, both geographically and over time. The 'settlers' who took up land given to them by the British crown killed off any resistance they encountered and completed the job with their diseases such as smallpox which the indigenous people had no immunity to. If you really believe that the aboriginals weren't slaughtered in their tens of thousands in Tasmania and NSW in particular then you either have your head in the sand or haven't read enough on it.

I know it can't be changed and things were different then and all that but it happened and there's no denying it.

(anticipates usual lefty etc comments)