In 2005, Professor Andrew Fraser wrote a short letter to his local paper protesting against the immigration of Somalians into Australia, asserting that African migrants were known to be associated with high levels of violence.
          In usually easy-going traditional Australia, where our freedoms were for granted, such a letter would be of no legal interest, as it would be just another example of someone expressing their opinion. Big deal. So what? If you disagreed with someone else's viewpoint, you could write an opposing letter to the paper.
          However, this democratic and common sense approach is no longer the case in multicultural Australia, a land wracked by political correctness, governed by interfering bureaucrats, and ruled by the political ideology of Multiculturalism. In this new land of politically correct horrors, thought-crime has become law, free speech has become illegal.
          Aware of overseas examples, the Multiculturalists seek to avoid creating martyrs when they persecute their political opponents. Instead, they seek to economically break those who have the cheek to oppose them. This is done by dragging targeted opponents through the courts, and imposing huge fines upon them, or ordering them to pay for "apologies" in big newspaper advertisements - all of which can easily add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars in costs. This sort of "civil law" attack has been used in Victoria, where Christian pastors Danny Nalliah (from Sri Lanka) and Daniel Scot (from Pakistan) have been sued under the Multiculturalism laws for giving their opinion about Islam to a Christian seminar.[1]

          As the Australian Constitution sets out the rights of Australians to a democratic form of government, it therefore contains an intrinsic right for Australians to be able to debate matters of public policy, and thus contains an implied right to freedom of speech that enables Australians to argue over issues in public.
          As Professor Fraser was obviously advocating a change in immigration policy to prevent an increase in the proportion or numerical intake of African immigrants, then his right to free speech is not only a moral right to freedom in a democracy, but should also be protected by implied rights contained within the Australian Constitution.
          In a democratic Australia, Professor Fraser's statements should be protected by the moral right to free speech, but since the political ideology of Multiculturalism is inherently neo-fascist, that moral right cannot be solely relied upon. The anti-democratic beliefs of Liberal-Labor politicians, ethnic lobbyists, and propaganda-peddling journalists all mean that their support for draconian Multicultural laws against freedom of speech must be fought on legal grounds, rather than just upon the basis of advocating free speech and democracy.

          Multiculturalists have little sense of decency or morality when it comes to fighting their enemies (which includes mainstream or traditional Australians). This has been recognised by those who have examined the political reality of Multiculturalism.

          For example, in Australia's Peril, it is written that,

          In order to carry out their anti-Australian policies, the liberal-internationalists of the Establishment are quite prepared to cast democracy aside in pursuit of their goals. ... liberal-internationalists believe that, no matter what 75% of Australians believe regarding immigration, the self-given duty of the Establishment's media and politicians is to press on with immigration policies that are opposed by the majority of Australians. ... politicians intend to ignore the views of the majority of Australians, in regard to immigration, no matter what. Opinion polls have consistently shown majority views against mass immigration from supporters of all of the major political parties, yet they are ignored. ... Politicians treat the views of ordinary Australians with contempt, as these "leaders" believe that only their views are correct, and that the rest of us need to be "re-educated", rather than the politicians abiding by what the majority want (a democratic concept that politicians only follow when it suits them).[2]

          Similarly, Michael Cathcart noted the menace of Multiculturalism when it becomes a country's politcally dominant ideology,

          Under different dominant ideologies, such concepts as the flat earth, market forces, the mental and moral baseness of slaves, Lebensraum, the tenets of Marxism-Leninism and (to take one modern Australian example) multi-culturalism, have been established as objective realities or moral absolutes. The marginalization of alternatives which are regarded as threatening to the dominant ideology (and thereby to the prevailing power structures) need not necessarily be achieved by physical punishment or persecution. In some cases, marginalization may be achieved simply by branding such alternatives as departures from the given nature of things. They may be declared, say, biased, immoral, dishonest, heretical or insane. ... In extreme or sensitive cases of mass dissent or non-conformity, the margin may be defined by police or troopers, either defending the ideology and power relations of the centre from ideological or physical attack, or attempting to contain or suppress activities which are considered dangerously marginal.[3]

          It can also be seen that, when it comes to any opposition to their political Multicultural ideology, many Multiculturalists have a lack of regard for democracy.
          Mainstream journalist Sam Lipski wrote

          But what about democracy? What if 75% of Australians do want, ahead of all other concerns, to slow up or stop Asian immigration... the democracy we inherited is not meant to be government by referendums... parliamentary democracy is an interwoven net of representative institutions, not populist ones... It requires nurturing, political leadership - especially from conservatives - and an occasional editorial.[4]

          We will not allow to become a political issue in this country the question of Asianisation.[5]

          In contrast to the machinations of anti-democracy journalists and politicians, Graeme Campbell - when he was the independent member of parliament for Kalgoorlie - argued succinctly for the rights of Australians:

          If the people of a nation do not have any rights to say with whom they share their country, what rights do they have?[6]

          Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.[7]

          However, apparently that doesn't apply to countries ruled by Multiculturalists. Multiculturalism is an authoritarian political ideology that hates freedom of speech. To all those whose want democracy, Multiculturalists say "Tough luck, suckers!"

          Multiculturalism is a new brand of Nazism. It seeks to stop free speech (fascism), discriminates against Australians (racism), and is committed to destroying the Australian People through immigration and assimilation (genocide).
          As a propaganda tactic, some journalists have taken to calling Australian patriots "White supremacists", and have used this emotive and misleading language as part of their ongoing propaganda campaign to outlaw dissent against the realities of Multiculturalism.
         
          Paul Kelly, a journalist for The Australian newspaper, wrote after the 11 December 2005 Cronulla rally,

          White supremacist cells need to be subject to the force of law. That means arrest and trial, the proper response in a multicultural society.[8]

          The clear inference is that Australians who disagree with the ideology of Multiculturalism, who want a return to a homogeneous, predominantly White Australia should be arrested for daring to oppose Multiculturalism.
          So much for democracy, freedom of speech, and the right to hold politically opposing views to those of the Establishment.

          All true Australians should support Professor Andrew Fraser against the storm-trooper thugs of Multicultural Nazism.

          1) Lobby your local Member of Parliament - write a letter (this is better than ringing, as it requires a written response) and pour on the pressure. However, it is recognised that lobbying is unlikely to help much, as generally speaking, it will be like trying to lobby a Communist MP - they will not help, as they are totally committed to killing off Australia as we know it, and will simply laugh at your naivety in trying to lobby them (behind your back, if not to your face). However, should you strike an honest politician who is willing to publicly call for a repeal of the anti-freedom "racial vilification" laws, then that would be great.
          2) Ring talk-back radio stations, and write letters to local and mainstream newspapers, expressing your support for Professor Fraser and freedom of speech.
          3) Support Australian Protectionists. Join the campaigning to awaken the Australian population to their peril.