Stop the boats. 5k a head. (cont. in Part 2)

[Max zero]

Fair points you raise. The reality is though, if we can't bring ourselves to relocate a few dollars to help those arriving on boats, what chance do we have of raising fund to save those that don't. Save the ones you can, we'll never save them all.

Maybe I have you pegged wrong. The last time I brought this up you actually agreed with me that we cannot save them all.

Although later on I did ask you to state your position when you claimed I had labeled you unfairly.

You never bothered to reply. Looking through several posts it seems you have been very vague on what you actually stand for.

I see no answer as why you think only 10-20k will apply for your regional scheme nor how you will enforce any limit.

 

[mottrain]

He wont provide a stat, he never does- all off the top of his rich imagination.

Lol cause it cannot be provided and all parties (not only government but refo supporters too) know there is fabrication. Hence how we now here refo advocates go *ed when conversing about the laws being made to stop this from happening. Pull your head out of the dirt.

 

[Floor Pie]

Lol cause it cannot be provided and all parties (not only government but refo supporters too) know there is fabrication. Hence how we now here refo advocates go ******ed when conversing about the laws being made to stop this from happening. Pull your head out of the dirt.

Rough estimate...

You seem to be saying it's the majority. So give a rough percentage, and how you came to that conclusion.


Max zero, I've answered your questions. And I've seen you thank Gough for answering. Then a few pages back, you have said gough just runs away and doesn't answer.


Here is another thing. I and others, are not being paid the big dollars to design policy. But we don't need to give exact numbers, and a completely working policy (of which we can't know for sure if it will work or not, because we will never be able to implement it), but we can damn well say that the way we are treating our captives, and our attitude towards asylum seekers, is disgusting.
And it's ok to be emotive, and use emotive language, because it's fellow humans we are talking about, not cattle.

You want some sort of perfect policy from anyone who disagrees with our current policy. Do you think our current one is perfect? Or even close to it?

There is no perfect solution, but I would rather a higher intake, than deaths in our captivity.

 

[romeoh]

Lol cause it cannot be provided and all parties (not only government but refo supporters too) know there is fabrication. Hence how we now here refo advocates go ******ed when conversing about the laws being made to stop this from happening. Pull your head out of the dirt.

Nope numerous sources can be cited showing that 90%+ of the asylum seekers are processed as genuine refugees. Go and do some research.

 

[mottrain]

Nope numerous sources can be cited showing that 90%+ of the asylum seekers are processed as genuine refugees. Go and do some research.

You haven't read what I have said and these same sources have been criticised and considered questionable due to the vast fluctuations in results. Some have given 88% and some 80% As for the intake, it is not being changed. Clearly the government is aware of the problems with boat arrivals and that the people present are able to massively manipulate the process to their advantage through the actions that are taken. For example, missing passports and document, concoct semi plausible unverifiable stories which work in their favour. Hence how the government has sought to change the test threshold to no longer in the refugee favour which was what the refugee groups like the greens got all angry about. Why? Because like the government they too tend to know that the change will kill off a lot of supposed 'refugees' because they then cannot get away with a somewhat plausible account anymore to claim that they are a refugee. This tends to be a clear sign that there is knowledge from these groups that a lot of the supposed 'refugees' are questionable at best or are actually economic refugees. Just because the statistic says 90% or whatever the real number is are refugees doesn't mean that this is true and also it doesn't take into account the hidden background details that ASRC or The greens will want people to know like the test mentioned above. This will work against this figure of supposedly 'legit refugees' even further.

 

[romeoh]

You haven't read what I have said and these same sources have been criticised and considered questionable due to the vast fluctuations in results. Some have given 88% and some 80% As for the intake, it is not being changed. Clearly the government is aware of the problems with boat arrivals and that the people present are able to massively manipulate the process to their advantage through the actions that are taken. For example, missing passports and document, concoct semi plausible unverifiable stories which work in their favour. Hence how the government has sought to change the test threshold to no longer in the refugee favour which was what the refugee groups like the greens got all angry about. Why? Because like the government they too tend to know that the change will kill off a lot of supposed 'refugees' because they then cannot get away with a somewhat plausible account anymore to claim that they are a refugee. This tends to be a clear sign that there is knowledge from these groups that a lot of the supposed 'refugees' are questionable at best or are actually economic refugees. Just because the statistic says 90% or whatever the real number is are refugees doesn't mean that this is true and also it doesn't take into account the hidden background details that ASRC or The greens will want people to know like the test mentioned above. This will work against this figure of supposedly 'legit refugees' even further.

Yep sometimes there are murky areas but we have had a pretty good process in place for a number of years now and they seem pretty confident they can ascertain refugee status based on several aspects. Surprises me not a bit that Morrison would be seeking to change things to keep even more people out. Keep it up Scotty, before you know it, our refugee intake will be down to zilch-success! Halleluhuh.
We take a piddly amount of refugees and you seem to take such pride in our attitude when its actually shameful.

 

[Brown Bottle]

If they felt in harms way one would expect they would still pay the smugglers to get them to Indonesia or Malaysia or some other third country?
But the point is - by not using the opportunities to flee to somewhere safer they are showing that they are only interested in paying for Australian citizenship, not to be safer, Bottle.

It might just be me, but if I was going to expend all my worldly possessions to find somewhere safe to live I'd want to know that it was somewhere safe, and where I could be resettled. If I knew that I was only going to end up cast adrift and with the prospect of winding up somewhere that I might be killed as easily as where I'm currently living I probably wouldn't take the chance.

This is called 'empathy' Jane. It's the ability to put yourself in someone else's position, rather than judge them from your position of superiority.

 

[Brown Bottle]

LOL. You are incredible. Statistics provided by the department of immigration are now incorrect because you've read an article? Of the >90% of boat arrivals that were determined by the Department to be genuine (that's 54,000 of them over the past five years), how many do you believe are actually not genuine?? Give me a figure.

Hi mate, I'm just going to let you in on a secret... you're arguing with a brick wall.

 

[Brown Bottle]

Wrong Jiska - seems your desperate people have chosen to to stay home and be raped, bashed and tortured rather than get on a plane to safety in Indonesia - and all because they can't get citizenship in Australia any more.

Let me see... would I prefer to be raped / beaten / killed in Sri Lanka / Iraq / Afghanistan or in a detention centre on Nauru / Manus / PNG?

Tough choices some people have to make eh Jane?

Not exactly like "What should I have on my water crackers tonight - Beluga or Double Cream Brie?"

 

[GuruJane]

Let me see... would I prefer to be raped / beaten / killed in Sri Lanka / Iraq / Afghanistan or in a detention centre on Nauru / Manus / PNG?

Tough choices some people have to make eh Jane?

Not exactly like "What should I have on my water crackers tonight - Beluga or Double Cream Brie?"

Obvbiously they have chosen to stay in their country of origin.

If they hadn't been guaranteed Australian citizenship not one of the 55K would ever have come here.

 

[Floor Pie]

Obvbiously they have chosen to stay in their country of origin.

If they hadn't been guaranteed Australian citizenship not one of the 55K would ever have come here.

What? Is your stance that there is no such thing as asylum seekers? They only flee their country, because they have been "guaranteed" Australian citizenship?...

Christ.

 

[Jiska]

You haven't read what I have said and these same sources have been criticised and considered questionable due to the vast fluctuations in results. Some have given 88% and some 80% As for the intake, it is not being changed. Clearly the government is aware of the problems with boat arrivals and that the people present are able to massively manipulate the process to their advantage through the actions that are taken. For example, missing passports and document, concoct semi plausible unverifiable stories which work in their favour. Hence how the government has sought to change the test threshold to no longer in the refugee favour which was what the refugee groups like the greens got all angry about. Why? Because like the government they too tend to know that the change will kill off a lot of supposed 'refugees' because they then cannot get away with a somewhat plausible account anymore to claim that they are a refugee. This tends to be a clear sign that there is knowledge from these groups that a lot of the supposed 'refugees' are questionable at best or are actually economic refugees. Just because the statistic says 90% or whatever the real number is are refugees doesn't mean that this is true and also it doesn't take into account the hidden background details that ASRC or The greens will want people to know like the test mentioned above. This will work against this figure of supposedly 'legit refugees' even further.

Okay, so if it's 80%, even if it's redneck territory of 70%, that's still a very large majority.

 

[Brown Bottle]

Obvbiously they have chosen to stay in their country of origin.

If they hadn't been guaranteed Australian citizenship not one of the 55K would ever have come here.

Herp derp Jane.

You are no closer to answering the question that I have posed a number of times, so I'll ask it again. Does their decision to stay put mean that they are out of harm's way?

 

[Jiska]

Herp derp Jane.

You are no closer to answering the question that I have posed a number of times, so I'll ask it again. Does their decision to stay put mean that they are out of harm's way?

Hi mate, I'm just going to let you in on a secret... you're arguing with a brick wall.

QFA

 

[Brown Bottle]

QFA

Jane is slightly more varied in her approach to obfuscation, although you do make a very good point.

 

[Max zero]

Rough estimate...

You seem to be saying it's the majority. So give a rough percentage, and how you came to that conclusion.


Max zero, I've answered your questions. And I've seen you thank Gough for answering. Then a few pages back, you have said gough just runs away and doesn't answer.


Here is another thing. I and others, are not being paid the big dollars to design policy. But we don't need to give exact numbers, and a completely working policy (of which we can't know for sure if it will work or not, because we will never be able to implement it), but we can damn well say that the way we are treating our captives, and our attitude towards asylum seekers, is disgusting.
And it's ok to be emotive, and use emotive language, because it's fellow humans we are talking about, not cattle.

You want some sort of perfect policy from anyone who disagrees with our current policy. Do you think our current one is perfect? Or even close to it?

There is no perfect solution, but I would rather a higher intake, than deaths in our captivity.

Did I mention you? I specifically called out Jiska.

I would rather 1 death in captivity then a few hundred deaths from drowning. What about you?

Where is your outrage about those deaths?

No solution is perfect but when people come up with stupid s**t like only 10-20k people will arrive from refugee camps if we offered free shelter, education and a path to a visa I will damn well say something. Just because the issue is hard does not give people a free pass to throw up the first idea that pops into their head. Case in point: Rudd/Gillard. I'm sure they had the best intentions but thats cold comfort to the few hunded corpses at the bottom of the ocean.

Feel free to be emotive all you want but it won't solve the problem. As we have see misplaced compassion can be just as dangerous as indifference.

Its amazing how no one will now admit to supporting Rudd's immigration policies. You could bet at the time they were announced they cheered him on but no one has the guts to now admit that it was a mistake. Apparently they didn't support either Rudd's or Abbott's ideas yet when asked what we actually should do instead they go all quiet. Or they offer up empty platitudes which sound nice but don't actually mean anything: "Just process them!" "Show some compassion!" etc.

 

[The Coup]

There's a big difference in the duty of care to people at sea (we need to follow our international obligations, but we don't have a requirement to save everyone, just to try to if we're aware of their situation and location) and our duty of care to people who have arrived and are seeking asylum.

 

[GuruJane]

Herp derp Jane.

You are no closer to answering the question that I have posed a number of times, so I'll ask it again. Does their decision to stay put mean that they are out of harm's way?

Yes it does. If you are in harms way and can buy a ticket out of there, you would.

 

[GuruJane]

It might just be me, but if I was going to expend all my worldly possessions to find somewhere safe to live I'd want to know that it was somewhere safe, and where I could be resettled.

But that doesn't make you a refugee under the UN convention Bottle.
If you gave that as a reason to UN assessors anywhere in the world you would fail the genuine refugee test. Didn't you know that?

 

[pazza]

So why have they stopped coming to Indonesia Jiska?

Can answer that one.

Asylum seekers now see Australia instead of being a welcoming and fair people, than being a bunch of racist campaigners. NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS OR CITIZENSHIP.

And that is the shame of it all.

 

[Maggie5]

Bit confused here, so if I find my family and myself in fear of my life, sell all I own to try and get to a safe country, UN assessors would not consider me as a genuine refugee? What then is the criteria?

 

[Maggie5]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...a-makeshift-boat/story-fni0cx12-1227108091223
Oh dear, came via Malaysia (Libs didn't like this idea), no documentation as doesn't know her actual date of birth (oh dear, familiar story), many others didn't make it on the boats as died at sea. Sound familiar?
Now a very wealthy woman, good on her.

 

[mottrain]

Yep sometimes there are murky areas but we have had a pretty good process in place for a number of years now and they seem pretty confident they can ascertain refugee status based on several aspects. Surprises me not a bit that Morrison would be seeking to change things to keep even more people out. Keep it up Scotty, before you know it, our refugee intake will be down to zilch-success! Halleluhuh.
We take a piddly amount of refugees and you seem to take such pride in our attitude when its actually shameful.

The thing is the process used previously was a shambles.

Hi mate, I'm just going to let you in on a secret... you're arguing with a brick wall.

Really reminds me of trying to reason/discuss with some of your lot.

Can answer that one.

Asylum seekers now see Australia instead of being a welcoming and fair people, than being a bunch of racist campaigners. NOTHING TO DO WITH POLITICS OR CITIZENSHIP.

And that is the shame of it all.

No it is not.

 

[JeffDunne]

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...a-makeshift-boat/story-fni0cx12-1227108091223
Oh dear, came via Malaysia (Libs didn't like this idea), no documentation as doesn't know her actual date of birth (oh dear, familiar story), many others didn't make it on the boats as died at sea. Sound familiar?

Yeah it does.

It sounds like the typical horrific experiences of people fleeing persecution.

Did you have a point?

 

[Maggie5]

Yeah it does.

It sounds like the typical horrific experiences of people fleeing persecution.

Did you have a point?

Yes, but it seems it went over your head, never mind.