Well gee, Hannah. After the Lebanese civil war, Australia, in a fit of misplaced generosity, took in tens of thousands of Lebanese "refugees" and all the thanks we got for that was a massive crime problem.

Lebanese males are fifteen times more likely to be incarcerated for crimes of violence and drug trafficking than the rest of the population in Australia. Once bitten, twice shy.

If you ever bothered to leave the safety of your yuppie areas and travelled to the suburbs on the extreme west of Sydney you will find tens of thousands of refugees. They are all Australians who fled the "Arab" areas of Sydney because they could no longer put up with the crime, shootings, and gang violence that your "humanitarian" ideals have inflicted upon them. 55% of the handgun shootings in the entire state of NSW occur within the confines of suburbs noted for their Arab populations. And you want to show the world how virtuous you are by inflicting more of the same on your own people?

Grow a brain.

I don't know where you live, Hannah, but London to a brick it is in some leafy inner city enclave near a university as far away from the consequences of multiculturalism that you can get. The question that you need to ask yourself is why there are no Danish, Norwegian, Dutch or French street gangs terrorising Australian neighbourhoods? But media reports consistently recount stories of shocking violent crimes involving the very same crime and welfare prone minorities who seem to be responsible for so much crime in every other western country that they foolishly imported into.

I know it may be impossible for reality to permeate through your impermeable cranium but you had better get it through your head that the quality of any society is a measure of the quality of it's people. And some ethnicities, cultures and religions do not make the grade.

The use of the word "refugee" in relation to wars zones,like Syria, is quite misleading--and, I believe, it is intended to be misleading.

The huge majority of those fleeing wars are not refugees in the UN/ Refugee Convention sense of the word.They might better be described as temporarily displaced persons.Yes, they are entitled to food shelter and clothing whilst in exile.But NO they are not entitled to resettlement in a country of their choice. Once the fighting subsides most should --and do-- return quite successful to their country of origin.

Kenya is now waking up to the fact that the "refugees" who it gave sanctuary to may have been assisting terrorist attacks on Kenyans.
Scandinavia is waking up to the fact that increasing numbers of its "refugees" don't call Sweden or Norway home, and when they are not jihading in Scandinavian cities are wont to return to fight for fundamentalist causes in the middle east. And Oz has has experiencing the same--though few want to talk about.

The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as a person who, "owing to well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or … is unwilling to return to it."

Many of the Syrian refugees have fled the conflict as a result of fear of persecution by the current regime, either as a result of their own political opinions or those of their community’s. They are therefore refugees as recognised by the UN, and will never be able to return to Syria while the current regime is in power. Others have fled the conflict as a result of continued violence and fear, and live in makeshift camps across neighbouring countries, with nowhere else to go.

Perhaps this conflict will resolve in the near future, and many of the refugees will be able to return home and start again. Perhaps only a few political refugees will require long-term resettlement. The point is however, that regardless of the final outcome, all of these people, and particularly the Syrian children, are suffering now. They require our support, aid and donations now. Children living in temporary tent settlements are not being provided with their basic rights to health, education and sanitation at this very moment.

Fear mongering, and the fear of predominately Muslim refugees, is one of the major problems in raising funds and aid for this crisis. This, and the tendency to only give while the headlines are flashed in our faces and images are on our screens are significant obstacles in protecting the rights of Syrian children today.

For the record, the author does not live in Sydney at all, but in a rural region based on post-war and continuous migration. Such stereotyping, as well as fear mongering, are indeed sadly some of the reasons why the funds being raised for the Syrian crisis are far less than the need

The primary refugees in Australia, Hannah W, are the Australians fleeing "well founded persecution" by Muslims in Australian suburbs. Ex Sergeant Tim Priest noted that while ethnic criminal behaviour has traditionally been directed by ethnic criminals towards their own ethnicity, with Muslims it was different. Muslim gangs seem to delight in targeting Australians, like the 70 "cat meat" "Aussie sluts" who were gang raped around the year 2000 by Muslim race hate rape packs in Sydney.

"Unfounded fear of Islam?"

Gee, let's examine that premise. How about the London underground? 9/11? Bali? Mumbai? Madrid? Mali? Sudan? Nigeria? Boston? Fort Hood?

Then there are child marriages, female circumcisions, amputations for crime, death sentences for adultery, homosexuality, apostacy, and blasphemy. Blatent gender discrimination with females not even considered adults but only minors. Beheadings, stonings to death. Muslim patrols in east London telling people that they are entering Sharia controlled areas. Schoolgirls being shot in the head for supporting female education. Very high incidence of rape by Muslim offenders in western countries. Endemic and inter generational welfare dependency in every western country. Unequal weight of gender testimony in Sharia.

And lets not forget the decapitation of a British soldier in London. Shoe and underpants Muslim bombers in aeroplanes. Marriages not requiring the consent of the bride. Honour killings. Muslim citizens or western countries caught fighting for terrorist organisations. Muslim riots over freedom of speech. Young women having their noses and ears cut off for fleeing their brutal husbands. Women having acid thrown in their faces for refusing to marry cousins. Gender segregation. Women punished for being raped. The murder of people who criticise Islam. Passages in the Koran which stress that Muslims must be violent towards non Muslims.

Looks more like justified fear to me, Hannah. What baffles me is how any woman can defend Islam?

Hi Hannah,

<<The 1951 Refugee Convention defines a refugee as a person who, "owing to well-founded fear of...>>
Yes indeed, and "well founded fear of persecution" sounds pretty strict, ay? Even one of those slick advertising agencies couldn't have come up with a niftier phrase! but the reality is as we have discovered from out own experiences in Oz. There is usually no realistic way to determine if they are relocated due to a "well founded fear of persecution", or, one of a hundred other reasons, so usually they are simply given the benefit of the doubt.

<<they will never be able to return to Syria while the current regime is in power.>>
That is fairy tale stuff! It is much much more likely that the most have fled the fighting, AND, the current regime wouldn't know most of them from a bar of soap. Why, even the Oz govt with the services of ASIO, the federal police and ANSS --and what we have been assured a thousand times is a thorough vetting process-- has little real idea of how many Tamil Tiger operatives, Burmese junta enforcers or Interpol's most wanted it has let in.

<<Fear mongering...is one of the major problems in raising funds and aid for this crisis>>
That is nonsense. The Oz govt gives more than most for refugee support/relief. What undercuts public support, is seeing beneficiaries our big hearted humanitarianism join fundamentalist causes --which they were supposedly running away from for fear of their lives -- or, worse, going back to their country of origins to fight for such causes.

What all this illustrates is a need to redefine what is a refugee
and what rights they have.
With moslem so called refugees most "western" countries have been duped.
We have not imported people fed up with their own country and wishing
to make a new life in our countries but a people who wish to change
our countries to be like their old countries and do it by forcing a religious change.

This is quite different to the previous waves of immigration.
There were only short term internal crime amongst some immigrants
and with most no ethnic crime at all.
With Moslems we are into second and third generation crime rings who
are organised on Sunni and Shia groupings.

In other words it has been much more than a dismal failure.