Robert, even in your native Italy, your fellow Italians are becoming so fed up of illegal immigrants crashing their borders, that the Mafia has made a comeback by murdering Africans and Albanians who are becoming a nuisance.

A friend of mine was in Italy during the Tampa incident and the Italian news services had it on TV during the day for more than a week. Your fellow Italians were asking why the Italian government did not react as strongly as the Australian government in turning back the boats? Every European country is the same. We are all getting fed up of being swamped by the ever increasing number of illegal immigrants who are fleeing the consequences of multiculturalism and the consequences of their own failed cultures. If you don't focus on that fact then you might as well go and shout down a well.

It is a bit much for an Italian like yourself to come to my country and start using the Royal "we" when you claim that "we" should have more compassion. Australians just love it when foreigners come to our country and wag their fingers at us because they want to bring their entire village or province to Australia, and they get upset when we don't want it. Some fool on another topic even claimed that rejected illegal immigrants would "hate" us for rejecting them. That works both ways, mate. If you want racism to grow, keep advocating your morally puritan attitudes and watch the growing phenomena of race riots in European countries.

Instead of thinking that you are morally superior to the citizens of the country that you aspire to be a citizen of, ask yourself why so mamy people want to live in Australia? The first thing that you should conclude is that the culture of the North European Protestent descended people is noted for always creating desirable places to live. That culture should be protected. And those failed cultures like Islam and multiculturalism that create dysfunctional societies, and failed policies like opposition to birth control that create overpopulation, should be criticised and attacked..

Well said LEGO; the real issue with the illegals [and they are illegal, just read the Immigration Act which proscribes the destruction of identity papers] is that most of them are muslims.

Every Western nation which has a % of muslims above 5% will experience massive social dislocation, no-go zones covering whole suburbs and towns and creeping sharia law.

islam is implacable yet the West and Australia is being betrayed by cowardly politicians and the msm which hide behind the default position that most muslims are moderate.

Anyone who is a muslim is not moderate; the only distinction in islam is between non-active and active jihadists.

How many times do exponents of islam have to express their intentions before the politically correct elites wake up. The answer is, of course, the elites never wake up; they would have to admit they were wrong.

Robert Battisti

Learn from History---
WORLD WAR 1 starts-- as a territorial, tribal conflict, between the Serbs&Germans

This is how World War 1 Started:---
The SERBS assassinated the German Archduke (The Serbs didn’t want the Germans controlling their sector).
The Germans reacted by commanding the army to bring the Serbs back under control. The Serbs turn to the Russians for protection.

WW1 begins-- between the Russians and Germans.
France,Britain, Australia&New Zealand(the Anzacs)
get pulled into the war because of their European alliances.
2 tribes--dispute over territorial control = War

WORLD WAR 2---Ethnic Cleansing of the Jews by the Germans, again tribal, territorial, conflict.
This is how World War 2 started:---
The Great Depression left 6million Germans unemployed. That’s when Jews were sacked from all possible jobs
and those jobs were given to Germans. German men stood outside Jewish shops and businesses and nobody was allowed to enter.
German shops were the only ones allowed to make a living.

WW2 Begins--- In a time of extreme economic hardship,the Germans simply took back all the resources in Germany because
there were not enough resources for two tribes. Not enough territorial cake to go around you might say.
(I don’t condone the terrible cruelty of the Germans, I am merely stating what caused it). Poland was also part of the territorial
grab by the Germans, who at some point in History actually had control
of those areas.
2tribes – territorial resources control = War

The Robert Battisti article raises some interesting points to reflect on. In an almost perfect world where it would be possible for one country to accept unlimited numbers of those seeking refuge without any negative consequences on the long-term cultural and socioeconomics we could simply open the doors and accept everyone in genuine need. Ah, but how do we define genuine?

Robert rightly points out that it is a basic human need and desire to want to live safely, free from persecution and threat to life. But this article does not look to the future or address the fact that most refugees heading our way are Islamic, unskilled, poorly educated and that it is unlikely they will assimilate into our culture. The Muslims bring with them a religious based culture that includes the ideaology all non-Muslims are infidels and therefore inferior.

Yes there are educated skilled moderate Muslims and some who are more tolerant of other religions. But we need to be careful for if going by the European experience, it will not be the Muslim immigrants converting to Western beliefs, it will be their way to set up enclaves and then communities of their own. Those communities will grow in size and in number as we have seen happening throughout Britain and Europe. Eventually the numbers grow so great new laws and acceptances of behaviour become necesary.

After reading this article I was left wondering if there might be a kind of 'Teach a man to fish' approach to the asymlum seeker issue: If the refugees are primarily only seeking a place they can have a safe life, should we or the UN consider building a new 'country' on one of the Pacific islands, or somewhere else, for refugees to live permanently. Would it be better to invest in building a city state or protectorate where refugees can go, work, and possibly prosper as creators of their own destiny

sbr 108: " should we or the UN consider building a new 'country' on one of the Pacific islands, or somewhere else, for refugees to live permanently."

We are kinda' doing this in PNG.

The UN is a talk-fest, incapable of actually making a significant difference in world affairs.

While we're dreamin', the UN should support a massive standing army capable of installing and maintaining a secular democracy in every country where one does not exist (Mmmm...China, Russia?).