Mr B hopes others are unable to distinguish fact from fiction

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Nov 21, 2011 at 21:40

Mr Bannerjee, who seems to be very confused about international trade and foreign relations, writes:

"My Answer ---> Let you be more specific here Mr. Hall. Why on earth you need to host 2500 American marines in a military base in Darwin ?"

Why not? It's good for interests of both countries. Local industries get a boost - and our defence forces develop abilities which will serve them well in times of war or disaster relief. As Mr Bannerjee would know - disaster relief from both the US and Australia figures prominently in this region especially over the last 10 years. Floods in muslim Pakistan and more recently Thailand attest to this.

"....Mr. Obama says it is because of the fear and threat of China..... "

Mr Obama was recently in Australia. he made no such claim in his address to parliament. perhaps Mr Bannerjee can furnish us with the exact quote and the time and place it was made?

'......Now Mr. Hall , if I understand correctly China is the biggest trade partner of Australia ($A 105 billion in 2010/2011)'

To make it clearer for the readers

% of total

1 China 13.2

2 Japan 12.3

3 United States10.3

So it has emerged in the last year that China has trumped Japan by less than one percent, and less than 3% for the US

'.... and it was because of Chinese demand that helped Australia cope up against the 2008 economic recession. '

To attempt to infer that China was solely responsible for having only minimal exposure to the world recession would be highly misleading - but that seems to be Mr Bannerjee's aim. Other factors need to be acknowledged - such as lack of corruption in the banking sector and having an economy based on sound economic principles (producing 'the world's best 'treasurer' - some say)

China does have a demand for our minerals and agricultural products but so does the US, Korea , Japan, Indonesia , Russia and many Middle eastern countries.

".....So why do you want to gang up against China with the US , "

That is more a projection of Chinese paranoia than anything else Who is ganging up against China? Do any of the Pacific nations think the US and Australia are 'ganging up' to attack them? Papua New Guinea, New Zealand, Fiji, the Phillipines, Japan, South Korea, Russia??? The US and Australia have a military alliance - but so do most countries. Does Mr Bannerjee not like that idea? But speaking of the Chinese - perhaps he would care to offer an opinion on whose self-interest the Chinese 'string of pearls' is serving?

'.....with the US which did not help you in any way during the recession ?"

Very poor research on the part of Mr. Bannerjee. Once again - refer to the facts:

% %

China 13.2

Japan 12.3

United States 10.3

"Is it only because the Americans as you believe speak better english and with white skin than the Chinese ?"

What an absurd statement. Is this evidence of an aggrieved muslim mind? We don't just 'believe' it - Americans DO in fact speak better English than the Chinese. And if Mr Bannerjee is going to bring race into it - many Chinese have very light skin. Mr Bannerjee does not seem to be aware of the vast political and cultural differences between Australia and China. Australia is not a communist country - nor does it supply arms to protagonists in various hotspots around the world.

"...Another point here is that what exactly are you hoping to gain from by standing against the biggest trade and economic partner of yours that is China ?"

Trade is trade. If one country wants to buy something another country has - that's fine. But it stops there.

It does not make country A beholden to country B in any way. If MR bannerjee goes into a shop and buys something from the proprietor - does Mr Bannerjee have some innate right to subsequently then force his desires and wishes on the shop owner? Or some right to influence what the shopowner thinks or does in the shop owner's house?? Or have an expectation that the shopowner shall only have friends of Mr Bannerjees choosing?

"....If it is not because your anglo-saxon origins , then why it is ?"

Most Australians derive from north west Europe - as do most Americans. But not all. Both have been colonies of Britain -and because of that speak the same language, have inherited more or less the same legal, health and educational systems and come from a Judeo-Christian background. It's historical fact. Don't like it?? Tough.

"...How much trade does you do with USA ? "

Again, 10.33%. That is a fact that would have been very easy for Mr Bannerjee to find for himself. The fact that he did not would allow readers to question whether Mr Bannerjee is interested in facts at all - or whether the gist of his post is just a general gripe against white Europeans.

So all your talk about rationality and improvment in life come to an end when it comes to this relation with the US because I am pretty sure by this extraterritorial pact with Mr. Obama , "

'Improvement in life' - has zero to do with having US facilities on our soil. . Some countries want what other countries have. As Mr Bannerjee would know - all the world's leaders and countries do not hold hands singing 'kumbayah' together. There have been relatively small numbers of personnel in US-Australian bases for the last 60 years or more. It's no secret. These bases have a purpose - giving both countries better military intelligence in times of peace and in times of conflict - which unfortunately occur as the pendulum swings in human affairs..

".....you will be downgraded towards the US allies like Japan or South Korean for example. "

What does this sentence actually mean? 'downgraded towards'?? Who is 'downgrading' whom? What does 'downgrading' mean - and what is its effect?

'You know in Okinawa Japan or Seoul Korea , if an American marine rapes a Japanese or South Korean woman , that marine can not be tried under the laws of those countries. So this is going to be your fate from now on , Mr. Hall.'

A truly bizarre statement. What does it mean? Mr Hall is going to be raped by US personnel in Darwin in after 2013 ? Such prescience from Mr Bannerjee. Mr. Bannerjee needs to check his 'facts about US personnel in Japan and S.Korea. If US military law overrides the jurisdictions in some countries - the US military . Mr Bannerjee once again has failed to research his facts before making statements . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Status_of_forces_agreement.

NB: '.....that U.S. courts will have jurisdiction over crimes committed either by a servicemember against another servicemember or by a servicemember as part of his or her military duty, but the host nation retains jurisdiction over other crimes.'

This presentation of untruth is such a consistent behaviour - it seems that we are listening to more muslim lies in this case.

'Anyways I should have understood this that you Australians are used to this fact. Tell me what was the reason that you send your boys to fight against Turks in Gallipoli ? Surely , Turks were not going to attack Australia , right ?'

Becoming rather boring. If Mr Bannerjee sincerely wants to know what Australia's alliances and obligations were at the beginning of the 20th century - and he has access to the III ( infernal Infidel Internet) - he can do his own research. But let's help him: http://www.firstworldwar.com/origins/causes.htm . Britain had military treaties with France - France had military treaties with Russia. Britain wanted to secure a route through the Black Sea to Russia

"Ultimately as it has been known , it all comes down to racial proximity , I am afraid which oversees your so-called rational and intelligent Western mind."

Who brought race up Mr Bannerjee? And so what if Europeans understand other Europeans (including Russians). ? Does that irk you?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".