Boat People

[Jars458]

Ahhh the generous attitude of middle class Australians who were lucky enough to be born into a life of privilege.

One wonders how some people on this thread would cope with being on the other side of the fence.

Compassion is in very short supply in this country. Little Johnny Howard has done his work well.

Clive - I pity you.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by KiNgCliVe26
If i were to ever leave this great country that i was born in i wouldn't rock up in another country illegally in a boat. I would go through the correct channels.

That's because you were privileged to be born in a great country. These people who are arriving in filthy leaky boats were not born in a great country. That's why they are so desperate to get out! Is that so hard for you to comprehend?
Do you really think if things were so good where they come from that they would take the risk of travelling in an unsafe boat to a country that they know will probably lock them up when they arrive if they had all the privileges that you have? Walk a mile in their shoes, sweetheart, and then see if you would still come through the correct channels. And while you are at it look up the word compassion in the dictionary.

 

[Bomber Spirit]

There's no doubt Australia's a better place than Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan. But if they're not refugees, they have no right to come here. We can't just let anyone in.

 

[Mead]

KC26 is a grade A idiot.

Having said that, I suppose in a grudging sort of way, I'm in favour of mandatory detention. Comes with voting for John Howard, I suppose.

If someone enters Australia and claims to be a refugee, they deserve to have their claim assessed in good faith. It goes without saying that they'll need to be detained while that happens. If an asylum seeker isn't held in custody, then why assess their claims at all? If someone is released into the wider community, why would they report to the airport for deportation if their applicationg for a temporary protection visa was denied? I sure as hell know that if i were in that situation, I'd do a bunk at the first opportunity.
So, without some sort of mandatory detention of all arrivals, there is no way a decision maker could enforce a decision on a claims, which beggars the question why even waste time making a decision in the first place.

So why not just let any one in? There seems to be this belief common to the left that anyone who is poor and oppressed is inately virtuous.
For example, many Palestinians are poor, oppressed and living hand to mouth existences. A fair proportion are also viciously intolerant to women, western society and religion. Its not unfair to suggest that before you release somebody into Australian society, you make sure that they're going to accept the basic rules of that society- The enormous racial strife Europe has suffered in recent years can generally be put down to unregulated refugee policies.

The current asylum seeker policy in Australia has some unjust and harsh elements, as does pretty much every bureaucracy, but it could be worse.

 

[Joffaboy]

Originally posted by KiNgCliVe26
If i were to ever leave this great country that i was born in i wouldn't rock up in another country illegally in a boat. I would go through the correct channels.

Its not illegal to be a refugee. Australia is a signatuary to the UN charter relating to refugees.

Ignorance in this thread is astounding.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by Bomber Spirit
There's no doubt Australia's a better place than Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan. But if they're not refugees, they have no right to come here. We can't just let anyone in.

That's why they all have to be assessed to determine their status.
Some of the ignorant cretins in this thread are suggesting we turn them away straight away or blow them out of the water. If that latter comment wasn't a ****take then I feel extreme pity for whoever it was who said it!

Under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.

You cannot just turn these people away without first ascertaining whether or not they are genuine refugees.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by myee8
Death no, immediate deportation yes.

You're as stupid as Milkdud. You guys are both on the oppposite extremes of the debate. I can't think of many extremes that are good.

Some of these boat people are genuine. If we go with your extreme, then we send them all straight back, and inevitably some will be going straight back to their deaths.

Just to save this minority, we have the moral responsibility to let them in and duely process them. At the other end of the keel, we don't want to let too many in without without verifying that they are genuine. But they do have the right to a fair hearing.

 

[Bee]

Originally posted by myee8
Death no, immediate deportation yes. Well, if the death if because of say a leaky boat or one that caught fire, then that doesn't matter.

Yeah, and put a few thousand homosexuals with them and you'd be as happy as a dog with two dicks. Wouldn't you?

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by Bee
Yeah, and put a few thousand homosexuals with them and you'd be as happy as a dog with two dicks. Wouldn't you?

Well now that you said it, yes.

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
You're as stupid as Milkdud. You guys are both on the oppposite extremes of the debate. I can't think of many extremes that are good.

Some of these boat people are genuine. If we go with your extreme, then we send them all straight back, and inevitably some will be going straight back to their deaths.

Just to save this minority, we have the moral responsibility to let them in and duely process them. At the other end of the keel, we don't want to let too many in without without verifying that they are genuine. But they do have the right to a fair hearing.

I meant no death as in from the Australian government killing the refugees themselves. That is why i preferred immediate deportation back to where they came from. If they get killed after going back to their country of origin, well that isn't my problem and shouldn't have to be the Australian government's either. If you want to come here do it properly, and don't jump the queue and give some sob story to us. The world is unfair and things will never go your way all the time.

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by myee8
If they get killed after going back to their country of origin, well that isn't my problem and shouldn't have to be the Australian government's either.

So if someone came to your door bleeding profusely and asked you to call an ambulance, would you knock them back because "it isn't your problem'?

Would you be happy to send a person away from this country to their imminent death?

 

[Nandrolone Stam]

Originally posted by bunsen burner
So if someone came to your door bleeding profusely and asked you to call an ambulance, would you knock them back because "it isn't your problem'?

Would you be happy to send a person away from this country to their imminent death?

Myee8 says he is a naturalised Australian of asian origin.

He sure is naturalised: a naturalised redneck Australian.

I wonder what his views on the White Australian Policy are?

 

[Luddite]

Originally posted by myee8
I meant no death as in from the Australian government killing the refugees themselves. That is why i preferred immediate deportation back to where they came from. If they get killed after going back to their country of origin, well that isn't my problem and shouldn't have to be the Australian government's either. If you want to come here do it properly, and don't jump the queue and give some sob story to us. The world is unfair and things will never go your way all the time.

Surely this is a joke?

are you being serious when suggesting this? Or are you just trying to stir up some argument?

 

[bunsen burner]

Originally posted by Nandrolone Stam
Myee8 says he is a naturalised Australian of asian origin.

He sure is naturalised: a naturalised redneck Australian.

I wonder what his views on the White Australian Policy are?

He probably lives in the western suburbs of Perth - redneck central.

 

[Milkman]

10 things which bunsen, and certain others (clive, nicko etc) obviously don't know about refugees:

1.
The number of refugees in the world today is significantly smaller than the number immediately after the second World War. The UNHCR estimates that there are about 20 million asylum seekers and “persons of concern” in the world today. By contrast, at the end of World War 2 there were about 30 million refugees, and the world’s population was much smaller than it is today.

2.
Boat people – people who arrive in a country and seek refugee status – are not “illegal”. Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights gives everyone a right to seek asylum in any territory they can reach.

3.
It is not an offence against Australian law to arrive in Australia without papers and seek protection as a refugee. However people who do so are held in detention centres: they are locked up until their refugee claim has been granted or they are removed from the country.

4.
Australia is the only country in the Western world which automatically locks up asylum seekers indefinitely. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has found that Australia’s mandatory detention system breaches article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

5.
Some boat people have been held in detention for as long as 5 years before being granted a visa. Many boat people are highly qualified, including doctors, engineers and teachers. They are also very brave, because the trip is dangerous.

6.
In September 2001, Australia announced the “Pacific Solution”. Asylum seekers trying to reach Australia by boat are picked up by Navy or Customs vessels and are taken to Nauru, in the Central Pacific, where they are “processed”. They are prevented by section 46A of the Migration Act from applying for an Australian protection visa. Some people detained on Nauru have been held ther for nearly 2 years.

7.
The number of boat people arriving in Australia at the time the Pacific Solution was announced was very small: just over 4000 had arrived in the previous 12 months. By comparison, our ordinary migration programme receives over 100,000 people per year.

8.
Most of the boat people who arrived in Australia during the previous few years were from Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran. Approximately 85-95% of them are ultimately accepted as genuine refugees.

9.
When a person is removed from detention, they are liable to pay the costs of their own detention. This is required by section 209 of the Migration Act.

10.
Amnesty International has condemned Australia’s Pacific Solution and Australia’s mandatory detention system. The Minister for Immigration, Phillip Ruddock, is a member of Amnesty International.

http://www.enhancetv.com.au/articles/feature15.html#02

 

[Blues4Life]

My feelings on boat people have changed as I've gotten wiser and actually semi-educated myself on the subject. I used to think the same as many, intercept the boats and either send them all straight back to where they came from or take them back to Australia and leave them in a detention centre until they were healthy enough to travel and then send them all back.

But recently I've found abit out about the issue and my opinion has changed. I didn't realise the number of people that came over were actually genuine refugees outweighed the 'illegal aliens'. The only fair thing to do in my opinion is to put them in a detention centre when they get to Australia and process the claims as quickly as possible. The big problem is that the process is too slow, perhaps more people need to be hired and more money put into the problem for a solution to come about.

 

[DaveW]

Originally posted by Milkman
4.
Australia is the only country in the Western world which automatically locks up asylum seekers indefinitely. The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention has found that Australia’s mandatory detention system breaches article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Interesting.

As a matter of interest, what's the process in other western countries?

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by bunsen burner

So if someone came to your door bleeding profusely and asked you to call an ambulance, would you knock them back because "it isn't your problem'?

Of course i would, it is a different situation and i would be most willing to ring the ambos and help patch the person up. That is a different situation and a ridiculous statement. There is no 'queue-jumping' going on here.

Would you be happy to send a person away from this country to their imminent death?

Yes. They all cry persecuted all the time just to pull at the heart strings and conscience of those who do not want to send them away to their death. You don't know who is telling the truth or not, and quite frankly, the Australian government shouldn't have to care.

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by Luddite
Surely this is a joke?

are you being serious when suggesting this? Or are you just trying to stir up some argument?

Does it look like i am joking? Surely you should know by now my opinions on various issues if you have seen enough of my posts.

 

[myee8]

Originally posted by Nandrolone Stam
Myee8 says he is a naturalised Australian of asian origin.

He sure is naturalised: a naturalised redneck Australian.

I wonder what his views on the White Australian Policy are?

Why can't i allowed to say no boat people? I mean i came here properly and am now part of this country so i should say who can come in or not. Multiculturalism has benefitted Australia in many ways, but it does come a time where only so much can come to Australia. In this instance i see myself as coming here in the right time. You cannot accept everyone who comes here, boat or otherwise.

 

[tribey]

I don't consider myself to be on the extreme left or the extreme right on this issue - I have my opinions and views and here they are. My reasoning is thus:

*If the majority of them are genuine refugees, why are they bypassing many other countries to come to Australia? If they are genuine refugees shouldn't their first concern be safety within the nearest port rather than hedging bets on a long dangerous trip to a first world country like Australia?

*How are they affording to pay 'people-smugglers' thousands of dollars for this trip and where is their identification when they get here? Could they not use this money to emigrate to another nation through proper channels?

I also have a problem with us sending genuine Timorese and Kosovar refugees on temporary-visas back to virtually nothing while our authorities spend millions of dollars intercepting, housing, feeding and clothing 'boat-people' - only to have some of them burn down facilities and act in a violent manner, inflicting physical and mental trauma on guards and nursing staff alike.

And what of those that are on the waiting list to enter Australia? They've done the right thing and now have to sit on their hands while these arrivals are processed and dealt with.

If someone would like to discuss this rationally by all means go ahead. If you're going to label me or cast aspersions then refrain.

 

[CharlieG]

Originally posted by dyertribe


*If the majority of them are genuine refugees, why are they bypassing many other countries to come to Australia? If they are genuine refugees shouldn't their first concern be safety within the nearest port rather than hedging bets on a long dangerous trip to a first world country like Australia?

*How are they affording to pay 'people-smugglers' thousands of dollars for this trip and where is their identification when they get here? Could they not use this money to emigrate to another nation through proper channels?

Exactly. The first point in particular confirms for me that they are NOT refugees: any of them. They may have refugee status when they go to Malaysia/Indonesia/other country from where they depart Australia, however once they leave those countries they are NOT fleeing persecution. They are in fact trying to choose, ahead of other refugees, which country they seek asylum in. At this point, calling them refugees is a joke and an embarassment.

I have no problem with refugees. I would fully support Australia doubling its refugee intake. BUT THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT REFUGEES WHEN THEY GET TO AUSTRALIA!!!

 

[otaku]

Originally posted by dyertribe
I don't consider myself to be on the extreme left or the extreme right on this issue - I have my opinions and views and here they are. My reasoning is thus:

*If the majority of them are genuine refugees, why are they bypassing many other countries to come to Australia? If they are genuine refugees shouldn't their first concern be safety within the nearest port rather than hedging bets on a long dangerous trip to a first world country like Australia?

*How are they affording to pay 'people-smugglers' thousands of dollars for this trip and where is their identification when they get here? Could they not use this money to emigrate to another nation through proper channels?

I also have a problem with us sending genuine Timorese and Kosovar refugees on temporary-visas back to virtually nothing while our authorities spend millions of dollars intercepting, housing, feeding and clothing 'boat-people' - only to have some of them burn down facilities and act in a violent manner, inflicting physical and mental trauma on guards and nursing staff alike.

And what of those that are on the waiting list to enter Australia? They've done the right thing and now have to sit on their hands while these arrivals are processed and dealt with.

If someone would like to discuss this rationally by all means go ahead. If you're going to label me or cast aspersions then refrain.

this sums up nicely how i see the situation

 

[Katthawk]

Originally posted by CharlieG

I have no problem with refugees. I would fully support Australia doubling its refugee intake. BUT THESE PEOPLE ARE NOT REFUGEES WHEN THEY GET TO AUSTRALIA!!!

I used to agree with this but I now see that it is blind ... for me at least.

I had insecurities about 'those other people taking my job'... until I realized I was too lazy to actually go for the job.

I see now its actually a good thing to give me a kick up the butt and I have had it too easy. I am always looking for someone who will take the smart arse white female who thought she was too good for anyone.

No actually, I just know it's my own problem so forget about the racism, it's always there, the sexism is always there, the ageism is always there.

It's YOUR fault. No it's actually mine. I don't complain. I know it's there. I just have to understand it.

 

[evade28]

Originally posted by dyertribe
I don't consider myself to be on the extreme left or the extreme right on this issue - I have my opinions and views and here they are. My reasoning is thus:

*If the majority of them are genuine refugees, why are they bypassing many other countries to come to Australia? If they are genuine refugees shouldn't their first concern be safety within the nearest port rather than hedging bets on a long dangerous trip to a first world country like Australia?

*How are they affording to pay 'people-smugglers' thousands of dollars for this trip and where is their identification when they get here? Could they not use this money to emigrate to another nation through proper channels?

I also have a problem with us sending genuine Timorese and Kosovar refugees on temporary-visas back to virtually nothing while our authorities spend millions of dollars intercepting, housing, feeding and clothing 'boat-people' - only to have some of them burn down facilities and act in a violent manner, inflicting physical and mental trauma on guards and nursing staff alike.

And what of those that are on the waiting list to enter Australia? They've done the right thing and now have to sit on their hands while these arrivals are processed and dealt with.

If someone would like to discuss this rationally by all means go ahead. If you're going to label me or cast aspersions then refrain.

yeah, good questions. i wonder if anyone will answer them!