Yawn

More leftist self-loathing. How refreshing.

Listen, if Australia is so racist, how come all these people want to come here? How come 50,000 people overstay their Visa's?

How about you write something positive about Australia for a change?

Reasonable article except for the occasional porkie.

While visa over stayers might outnumber asylum seekers, they don't claim welfare, as this would flag their presence to the authorities, and if they do work, while they don't pay tax, neither are their wages tax deductible, so the jobs are generally those for which Aussies cannot be found. In addition, most return to their countries of origin before they become a burden to the state, and when found are swiftly deported.

All in all, the 50 000 over stayers probably cost the state a fraction of what the 3000 boat people do, who require, processing, housing, medical, education etc on the public purse.

While post is designed to indicate a sense of proportion about the boat people, its logic is as false as your outrage.

There is a difference between the Government and the Opposition. The former has proved it can stop the illegal boats with offshore processing and Temporary Protection Visas (there is no requirement to provide permanent asylum for anyone, provided they are not refouled) when they were in government.

In contrast, the latter (now the Government) encouraged illegals by scrapping TPV’s – thus giving smugglers the ability to tell illegals that they would get permanent residence - and, currently, the PM just like her predecessor, has stuffed up another ‘plan’ to halt illegals boats.

So, why doesn’t the Gillard Government do something about the 50,000 visa over stayers? Well, if Gillard cannot deal with obvious, in your face illegals coming on boats, she cannot be expected to be able to deal with the over stayers who have embedded themselves into the wider community.

Even the Opposition, which can, and will if elected, deal with the boat illegals by removing the people smuggler’s sales pitch for permanent residence, it is highly unlikely that they will be able to solve the problem of visa over stayers on a meaningful level because it is extremely difficult to find people when they disappear into the populace.

So, of course, Jennifer Wilson, a Left-wing academic with an interest in ‘human rights’ comes to the conclusion that both major parties in Australia are ‘racist’, as people of her kind do.

It surprising that academics have not been taught English and how to understand a dictionary well enough to know the definitions of words like ‘racist’ so that they could stop making fools of themselves, but that’s they way it is. Anyone who does something they don’t like is a racist.

Why are there so many people coming here, legally and illegally, if we are such monstrous racists?

It is not racist to “… single out Afghans and Sri Lankans as public targets for deportation…” as part of border protection (weak as it may be) when it is only those two groups trying to enter illegally and making no bones about. The few over stayers who are caught and deported are of all races and colours, including the two groups mentioned by the author. Many of them are actually white Europeans – but Wilson couldn’t let that stop a good ‘racist’ story, could she!

But, to really ‘prove’ her point about the terrible ‘racism’ of Australia she drops the illegal entrant yarn to point out how ‘racist’ the NT intervention was. Her real intent seems to be to rubbish Australia – period.

The woman is far from being rational and logical. This old red herring has been brought up umpteen times, but the solution to stopping and ridding ourselves of visa over stayers – who are illegals once their visas have run out – has nothing to do with illegal boat arrivals. Certainly they should be caught and deported immediately, the rotten cheats. But none of the people who seek to say it’s OK to ignore boat illegal entrants just because we cannot catch other illegals who have come here with a passport and visa, have ever come up with a solution as to how we can increase the apprehension of these equally illegal people.

Using legal entrants who become illegal as a reason to go soft on boat arrivals is a stupid as branding us racist; neither will make any difference to the situation.

Jenny also wins the prize for the most gratuitous use of the term racist in a single sentence.

To highlight the number of overstays is one thing but to fool the public into not seeing this as a separate issue is downright dishonest. Dr Wilson shows by her racist rhetoric that she is more concerned about her leftist dogma than she is the number of aboriginal kids that are abused. Otherwise she would not make such bias comments re child abuse. By her logic having additional aboriginal services which are numerous is racist against the whites. The intervention was necessary because of the epidemic cases of young girls with std's. To deny and ignore this is plain stupid or dishonest.

Anyone willing to think a little knows these overstays had not thrown away their documentation before arriving here. At least they arrived legally. They don't collect the dole or receive housing and medicare. Yes they should be deported just as all those abusing children should be dealt with by law. To fail to recognize that the issues of illegals risking their lives in boats and paying traffickers is different from the overstays is simply naive or dishonest. Being a Dr I suggest she is not naive but blinded by her own racist dogma. Anyone who thinks clearly can see it is better to discourage these boat arrivals rather than encourage them like the current incompetent Government has done. Now they want to change their policy (at least in the eyes of the electorate) without an ounce of humility in declaring that they have simply got it wrong. They now want to copy Mr Howard's solution and pretend that somehow they are more compassionate. Sickening really.

con't

Those saying we should accept all who come to our doorstep are never willing to put a number of how many. Their rhetoric is always that we only have a trickle compared with others. I hardly call three boat loads of people a week who have not had health checks, have often past through many other nations and have money to pay traffickers money. There are just as many if not more poor souls waiting to come here legally. Many have had family members in Sri Lanka, Africa and other places waiting years to come here lawfully only to be gazdumped by those willing to risk the lives of children to get here and to use blackmail to get what they want. We read last week of the 'refugee' who holidays 3 times a year in Afghanastan after coming here by boat. He spent 3 months catching up with friends while our soldiers die in that nation. Go figure!

I notice one of the interests of the author is 'creative writing' I bet she excelled at that.

Hey, hang on! She is getting stuck into the present government, which I reckon is the most incompedent government we ever had and I want to see the last of.

So Yeah, if Julia can't do anything about the 50,000 overstayers, who are mostly tourists still spending money and then leave on their own volition, how can she possibly stop the 'illegals' coming by boat.

Jennifer google can be quite useful, it even helps with the search terms

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/86overstayers-and-other-unlawful-non-citizens.htm

http://www.visabureau.com/australia/news/21-10-2009/most-australian-visa-overstayers-are-english-lads.aspx

http://www.news.com.au/national/no-detention-for-visa-dodgers/story-e6frfkvr-1225708050188

http://epress.anu.edu.au/anzsog/immigration/mobile_devices/ch01s04.html

R0bert

I think these posts are proving the author's point.

Everyone seems to assume that all asylum seekers who arrive in boats don't have papers. That's not the case. Many do have papers, and some don't.

"Many overstayers are white Europeans" - exactly. Proves the author's point that they aren't being pursued and deported like the non-white, non-Europeans.

"Overstayers are backpackers who go home." Well, how do you explain all the advertisements in backpacker magazines for lawyers who'll advise them on making refugee claims?

"Why do so many people want to come here if we're so racist?" Well that just goes to show how dreadful the circumstances are that they're trying to escape.

Plus they don't know we're racist till they get here.

Overstayers looking to stay make the same claims on the public purse as boat people. They don't have the money to support themselves either, otherwise they'd have gone through the proper channels.

Overstayers seeking refugee status have also jumped the queue on people trying to come here through the proper processes.

And if doing jobs Australians don't want to do is a reason to let them stay, boat people are famous for doing jobs Australians don't want to do, so why can't they stay too?

And for your information, whoever it was, white children who are sexually abused suffer from STDs as well, its just that nobody talks about it

Briar rose you write

'Overstayers seeking refugee status have also jumped the queue on people ' Could you please give us the numbers of over stayers seeking refugee status or is this more lies from the left?

Runner, go to the Amnesty pages, or Immigration pages and find it for yourself.

In the meantime I can tell you this: More asylum seekers who arrive by boat are given refugee status than asylum seekers who arrive by plane. The latter are usually returned to their homeland when caught, while the majority of the boat people are allowed to stay.

From that, I think it's reasonable to conclude that the boat people everyone loves to loathe are genuine refugees, while the overstayers are perhaps not.

Almost every asylum seeker the Howard government banished to the misery of Nauru was found to be a genuine refugee by the UNHCR.

Unlike overstayers, boat people cannot just disappear into the general population. They are forced to be properly processed and assessed and if they aren't telling the truth they are deported. Overstayers don't have to put themselves through these legal processes. They are illegals in the true sense of the word.

Which crowd make the best citizens I wonder?

I'd like to see figures on how many of the legal arrivals who overstay/que-jump are here to overrun our society as do many of the illegal arrivals. I still can't shake the feeling that many illegal arrivals are agenda based. Just wondering why so many muslim refugees choose to come to Australia instead of going to say, Saudi Arabia which is a muslim nation & far more wealthy. It also wouldn't involve a dangerous sea journey.

briar rose

no one is arguing that the boat people are not genuine refugees. The point is by their are hundreds of thousands of refugees worldwide. It is fairer to all for those who use come here lawfully to be given preference. I did not think you could come up with statistics on those who apply for refugee status after over staying visas. As I suspected it is another half truth from the left. By the way Amnesty really has little credibility with people interested in facts.

Dear Runner
I can only suggest that you visit one of the countries asylum seekers are fleeing and give them a good talking to about the proper way to be a refugee. That should sort them out.

I don't know whether or not you've ever experienced terror and desperation. I don't know if you've ever been homeless and in life-threatening danger. I do know that when under those kind of stresses human beings do everything they can to survive.

Yes there are hundreds of thousands of refugees in the world. I've met a few. Members of my family worked in refugee camps in Tanzania. Believe me, these places, and the war torn countries refugees are fleeing are way beyond the rule of law you seem to think they should be following. Get real. Just use your imagination. How would you feel if it was you and your family?

And whether or not you consider Amnesty to be strong on facts, their people do good work for suffering human beings.

In conclusion, if you don't know the circumstances in these countries, maybe you should zip it a bit on the judgements

Jennifer Wilson has an involvement in Human Rights.

Here on OLO that alone is enough to get you hammered by some posters!

[Deleted for abuse].

*Well, how do you explain all the advertisements in backpacker magazines for lawyers who'll advise them on making refugee claims?*

Quite simple really. The UN Convention is so full of holes, that
a good lawyer could get just about anybody in, with a bit of
coaching. The Convention needs a good overhaul.

Jennifer has her knickers in a twist over nothing here, for of
course as is highlighted in Roberts links, most of the 50'000
are simply people having a bit longer holiday.

Claiming racism is wrong too. As part of the 13'000 refugee
quote, our Govt takes people from refugee camps in Burma and
similar places. I have heard nobody complain about that, so
the racism argument is a furphy.

It's just that the Burmese don't have the cash, as do Afghans and
rich Sri Lankans, so they are stuck in refugee camps, while
the other two can purchase their Australian visa by paying people
smugglers. Now that is hardly fair and if Jennifer really cared
about human rights, she would care about those refugees who are
not cashed up

Yabby, "the other two can purchase their Australian visas by paying people smugglers"?

I thought the big argument was that the Afghans and Sri Lankans don't have any papers, let alone Australian visas.

I didn't know people smugglers sold Australian visas. I thought the argument is that they tell people to destroy all their documents.

The reality is people keep arriving in boats and that isn't going to stop anytime soon. So what do you want to do with these people, Yabby? Find out if they are genuine refugees and re-settle them? Or tell them they've jumped the queue and turn the boats back and drown them?

In practice it hardly matters that it's "unfair." What matters is that they're here, they're going to keep arriving, and we have to work with that reality. You can complain about unfairness all you like, that isn't going to stop them coming, and it isn't going to stop the problem of how to deal with them when they get here.

The world's unfair. Work with it. Being even more unfair isn't going to redress the balance. Treating the Afghans and Sri Lankans badly isn't going to help the Burmese one bit.

Wow, what a hysterical article!

There are certainly legitimate concerns about Gillard, or Rudd or Howard before her, not dealing with visa overstayers.

But the author’s extremely strong condemnatory language of these people just destroys her credibility, as does her branding of Gillard’s or Abbott’s policies on asylum seekers as racist.

There is absolutely no need for the racist slur… and it is totally wrong!

Can’t we talk about the vexed issue of asylum seekers and other immigration law infringers, and our national refugee and international aid programs, with a somewhat more level head than Jennifer Wilson appears to have?

Yes of course Gillard should be addressing visa overstayers, although I don’t think that they are anywhere near as bad as the author is making out.

But the author has missed a huge aspect of this whole debate – she has had nothing to say about Australia’s formal refugee or international aid programs or how they could be improved. Surely this is of at least as much relevance to the asylum seeking issue as visa overstayers. http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10682#176652

Leigh asks:

<< Why are there so many people coming here, legally and illegally, if we are such monstrous racists? >>

Would you care to answer this question Jennifer?

*The world's unfair. Work with it*

You don't say? Does that perhaps explain your bias towards
Sri Lankans and Aghans and against the Burmese who happen
to be poorer?

What is your real agenda, for clearly its not about
fairness.

*You can complain about unfairness all you like, that isn't going to stop them coming, and it isn't going to stop the problem of how to deal with them when they get here.*

Quite simple Briar. Protection visas only for those who come here
by boat or plane, permanent residency for those from refugee
camps, like the Burmese. That should fix it. As things are
improving daily in Sri Lanka, the first can start heading home
already.

It never ceases to amaze me how Australia is always accused of racism by the very people it provides so much effort to support, even the blatantly non-deserving. I can't recall anyone calling the refugee producing countries racist. When the western peace forces go in to try to stabilize these countries then our ignorant academic background journoes scream blue murder from the roof tops. Isn't it about time these home grown terrorists are told to shut up & stop de-stabilizing the efforts of those who really do care & make an effort to find a solution ? If people like Jennifer are so convinced that they have the answer then go ahead & go to the refugee factories & stop production. Bet they haven't got the guts to do so. It's much easier to bleat racism isn't it ?

Despite the fact that Australia has been obsessed with keeping non-'white' immigrants out of the country since before Federation, I don't think that as a nation we're any more racist than most other countries. However, that evidently doesn't stop our politicians from quite deliberately appealing to the bigotry of the minority in order to try and stay in power.

Having said that, if OLO is anything to go by, many of the more vocal opponents of humane treatment of asylum seekers most definitely fall into that racist minority who give the rest of us a bad name.

Racist government, racist opposition, racist debate – surprised anyone would ever want to come here, in a leaky boat or otherwise

To 50,000 illegals here already

Well stopping more, be they in boats or planes, is in the best interests of Australia

It is not immoral and suggesting disproportionate treatment of boat illegal’s is simply answered

Two wrongs do not make a right

The likes of Jennifer Wilson do not want “honest debate”

They want open borders

They are the leftie swill, overdosing on personal self-loathing and they view their fellow Australians with contempt.

The more they are ignored, the better off we will be.

Speaking of whom, hi Col!

cj "doesn't stop our politicians from quite deliberately appealing to the bigotry of the minority in order to try and stay in power."

If they were a minority, no one would worry about it - clearly, the "racists" are a majority since they can drive policy .. unlike for instance, the minority AGW hysterics, who cannot .. so the racists are a majority, and the AGW hysterics are a minority.

Like it or not, Australians are racist, get over it and stop worrying so much about it.

Many countries are blatantly racist - so what?

Does the rest of the world do anything? No.

Do they actively lobby them? No.

It's actually acceptable to the rest of the world, but evidently not to little minorities in places like Australia where people want to live in some kind of nirvana, which is an illusion anyway.

What's the big problem with being racist, it's human nature, you need to accept it, like you need to accept that the climate changes and you can't do anything about it, excapt p*ss and moan, (as usual.)

It is a pity that the Gillard Government does not take the obvious step in regard to the “boat people” and simply take the total number that have arrived off Australian shores from the total number of immigrants that are to be allowed in the following year.
There would be the usual outcry about queue jumpers but the net effect would be to decrease the number of arrivals to the number decided as reasonable by the government.
They could be processed normally and any that are not acceptable returned to their original countries or any other that would have them. All the nonsense of processing offshore should be disbanded and reception centers in a suitable places set up. These should be on the outskirts of the major cities and would keep the costs down as well as providing employment.
The level of immigrants should be reduced anyhow to a sustainable level from the 300,000 odd that are coming in at the moment.

“Visa overstayers will no longer be locked up and deported when caught by authorities, in a major softening of immigration procedures,” according to Immigration Minister, Chris Evans.

Why not when they’ve broken the law? Who among us could be so lucky? Then there are the people breaking the law by harbouring the fugitives. Would that be another fifty thousand?

So we have fifty thousand over stayers (and growing) potentially working illegally through 'cash in hand' jobs while everyone’s fussing about genuine boat arrivals?

Australia has an ignominious reputation for harbouring criminals. History tells us that there would be several rickety boat loads of Nazi war criminals and Nazi collaborators living among us with impunity.

Recently West Australians were robbed of more than $6.5 million by thugs skimming EFTPOS machines, according to Assistant Commissioner Nick Anticich. These criminal activities are also being committed by newcomers in Canada and Britain – rip off the host nation!

This month, 20 EFTPOS thieves were apprehended in WA – 19 were Sri Lankan Tamils. Similar offences are also being committed by Bulgarian and Romanian ethnics. Therefore, the taxpayers (including the victims) must now pick up the tab if these thieves are incarcerated though a slap on the wrist is more likely.

Newcomers and relative newcomers, abusing a host country’s hospitality, should be deported immediately. Rubbish in – rubbish out!

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=10669#176680

C J Morgan, Wrong again as usual. You have an amazing capacity for posting comments that say the exact opposite of what is true.

You & all the other Loony, Left members of the Red/green/getup/labour Communist Coalition are the only Racist Bigots in this country.

You just hate, loath, despise working & middle class bourgeois Aussies, be they, black First Australians, or White Second Australians. We are all second class, according to you.

You are a walking, talking, poverty creation scheme. You can't wait to take public housing & good mining jobs away from Blackfellas & give them to Muslim terrorists.

It is you who represent 1% of the Aussie population. 80% to 90% of the population, want to reduce immigration of all kinds & people like you say that there is something wrong with politicians who want do what is electorally popular in a democracy.

What is wrong with you?

Sorry i forgot about the PC Thought Police who have been brainwashing you for 50 years now.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

Do everybody a favour. Watch the video, all of them, in fact & get over yourself. The Frankfurt School was designed by Communists to destroy Capitalism.

What part of "Enemy of the State" or "Anti Social" or "Fifth Collumn" or "Cultural & Economic Terrorism" don't you understand?

Nice one, Formersnag. Quite hilarious, in fact. You're getting funnier these days, now that you're not just targeting women.

You're really a comedy writer who posts here when you're bored, right?

The use of "extremely strong and condemnatory language" in the article was deliberate.

It's the language used since the Tampa by those who oppose the "boat people."

The hysterical tone of my article is also an imitation of the hysteria that has surrounded boat arrivals since that time.

Sometimes taking language and tone and applying it to a different set of circumstances can demonstrate what it is, in a way that nothing else can.

I'm amazed at the discussion about "fairness" that always seems to come up in relation to asylum seekers who arrive by boat. I don't recall "fairness" being much of an issue in other topics. The boat people had money to pay for their passage and other asylum seekers don't. This is in a sense unfair. I don't argue with that.But do you want to drown them for it?

What does interest me is that nobody throws in the "fairness" card when we're talking about all the Australians who walk around with aching and rotten teeth, for example, because they don't have the money for treatment. That's not fair. Why aren't you shouting about it? Why does fairness suddenly become a serious public issue only with regard to asylum seekers jumping queues?

Or if you don't like the teeth example, pick any out of hundreds, all to do with money and lack of it.

The usual abuses of being a bleeding heart self-trashing leftie who wants to run Australia down and land us all back in the slime are nothing more or lesss than I'd expect after writing an article such as that.

The language I used has been in use in this country at the very highest political level, on talk back radio, in tabloid newspapers for years. It's the kind of language that will land us back in the slime, and I'm very glad to have brought this to the attention of many who, given their posts, would never have given it a second thought if it had stayed where they wanted it, against the "boat people."

Thank you for reading my article. Jennifer Wilson

We're the only nation to be officially recognised as being racist by the UN.

It's a historical fact that the country was founded on racism.

Federation was intended as a method of keeping out the Chinese - and ever since, racism is like sort sort of national team sport, where the new arrivals are targetted until somebody else takes their place.

Where are all those Asians we were being supposedly "swamped by" ten years ago? Immigration has increased since those dangerous days so where have they gone?

I think they're now in anti-Middle Eastern cheer squad and have become one of "us", just as the Italians, Greek, Poles and all others before them took their turn against those that came later.

"Shut the gate behind me".

If we don't want to live up our obligations as signatories to International Agreements, then we should at least have the courage to officially tear them up and walk away.

Ludwig, in answer to your question, I don't think we are "such monstrous racists". I agree with CJ Morgan that we are probably no more racist than a lot of other nations.

I don't believe people escaping situations such as those the asylum seekers are fleeing stop to wonder if the western democracy they hope will take them is going to be racist towards them.

On the other hand, overseas students who are not coming from a traumatised environment do wonder about our racist reputation. Which we do have, sorry Ludwig. Some students decide we are, and they go elsewhere for their education.

There's a hierarchy of needs - if you're fleeing for your life you probably don't think the finer points through, as you might if you are only considering where to get your tertiary education.

The posts in response to my article seem to prove the point I was attempting to make. There is a frightening degree of loathing towards asylum seekers who come here by boat. That degree of loathing needs to be acknowledged and addressed because it isn't good for any of us. Thank you for engaging with my article. Jennifer.

Wobbles - just who signed up to these International Agreements, and what rights do they have to do so .. it is obvious that the majority of Australians - who everyone including the UN says is racist, did not agree to this.

So, I'm in agreement with your proposal, tear up these agreements .. unless everyone in the world is prepared to live by them, including the countries who seem to spew refugees out to the rest of the world .. then bugger it, why should we be the catchall for the world's self created misery.

If your country has problems, stay there and fix it .. leave the immigration to people who want to move to another country to join that society, not to live somewhere with all your baggage and hatred you brought from the old country, never intending to do more than suck off all you can and never take up the values of the new country.

It just encourages despots who know they can get rid of malcontents because bleeding heart, hand wringing and weeping whites of European stock tend to be soft touches to the intolerance of other societies.

I reckon if you put it to referendum, Australia would be out of the UN agreements in a heartbeat ... they do us no good whatever, all we do is encourage people to come here, knowing they do not need to fit in, and eventually can demand yet more tolerance from us while showing us none at all.

Where does the UN get off anyway passing judgement on us? What about countries like Japan and South Korea who take zero migrants?

That statement about Australia being named as racist by the UN should be worn with pride! Have a look at the mobs in the UN, sure, lots of tolerance there .. not! Everyone who shows tolerance, gets run down by parasites who have no intention of actually joining their societies as good citizens .. let's end this rubbish.

<< The use of "extremely strong and condemnatory language" in the article was deliberate. >>

Yes, obviously Jennifer.

<< It's the language used since the Tampa by those who oppose the "boat people." >>

What?? !!

Totally untrue! By a small fraction of them, possibly, but certainly not by the majority.

You are obviously very critical of those who have opposed boat people for supposedly using this sort language. So then, how could you lower yourself to a level that you clearly think is pretty damn low by using the same sort of linga??

Not logical, to say the least!

This sort of language certainly makes people take notice of an article like yours. But it sure doesn't help your cause or lead anyone to think well of you! In fact, I reckon that some of those who agree with you would be a little embarrassed and wanting to distance themselves from it.

<< Ludwig, in answer to your question, I don't think we are "such monstrous racists". I agree with CJ Morgan that we are probably no more racist than a lot of other nations. >>

Glad to hear it.

<< The posts in response to my article seem to prove the point I was attempting to make. There is a frightening degree of loathing towards asylum seekers who come here by boat. >>

Really? I don't see that at all. Sorry, but I think that you are quite off the mark there. You seem to have either misinterpreted posters' comments or you seriously want to think that those who are against onshore asylum seeking and people smuggling hate those seeking asylum, to the point that you are reading it into peoples' comments when it isn't really there.

Anyway, thanks for engaging in the discussion. Too few article writers do that on this forum.

I don't know where you've been Ludwig but the language used by shock jocks and the Howard government about the boat people was pretty condemning: Illegals,criminals, invaders, terrorists, diseased, ragheads and plenty I can't even post in this forum. Not just by a minority, Ludwig but by enough people to get governments interested in keeping them on side.

Maybe Jennifer Wilson should give up writing satire and parody for OLO - doesn't look like too many posters get it

Thanks for the comments, Jennifer. While I agreed with the sentiment of your article, I had thought the language was a little over the top - and yes, you've parodied the haters well. I've noticed that irony doesn't work too well at OLO.

If Ludwig claims to be unaware of the fear and loathing hyperbole that is routinely deployed when the topic of asylum seekers is discussed here (not to mention at some of the MSM sites) then he's either being disingenuous or is totally blinded by his own obsession with 'border control'.

The wisdom from the dark side :)

"they appeal to the bigotry of the minority to stay in power".. err...

I wonder if anyone else see's the rather glaring self contradiction there ?

Since when to politicians appeal to 'minorities' to stay in power?

Oh.. I guess they all live in marginal seats :) let's hope so anyway.

Oh wait.. GREENS do that.. but their minorities are assylum shysters/country shoppers.

50,000 VISA OVERSTAYERS... is a figure which needs to be examined more closely.

1/ Very very smalllll numbers of these ever end up remaining.
2/ Most by far are found..and given the short shift out via a detention centre if needed.
3/ Rarely do they seek 'refugee' status.

Well.. at least that seems to be the message from the Dept of Imig.

*What does interest me is that nobody throws in the "fairness" card when we're talking about all the Australians who walk around with aching and rotten teeth, for example, because they don't have the money for treatment. That's not fair.*

Now there is a thought Jennifer. If we didn't have to spend a
billion bucks a year, fighting off boats with sticks, we could
spend that money on fixing poor peoples teeth!

Its high time that the UN Convention was updated, so that
these little costly jokes end and money is more effectively
spent. The Brits have spent a fortune on all this. Now they
are in the poo as the Govt is running out of borrowing power,
so they are sacking public servants to make ends meet.

Well said Yabby.. *amen*

RACISM ? with echo's of Crod Dundee II.. "You call 'that' ...racism?"

THIS...is racism.

Occasion... a festival where lot's of people gathered.

"
I hate black people.. I hate every last one of them.. I hate every iota of them.
Do you want freedom?- WHITE power!.. I said.. WHITE power!... hey white brother.. what are you doing with that black whore hanging on your shoulder ? Don't you know they are scum? WHITE power!... brothers.. if you want real power, you're gonna have to KILL some coons.. kill their babies!"

Now..before anyone leaps for the 'delete' button.. you need (yes.. you do) to see this... and realize just how vile such speech is...no matter WHICH skin color utters it.

Hate speech is hate speech.. it does not become 'not' hate speech or 'not' incitement to murder depending on the color of skin of the person who utters it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVcfymOvoUo

Black attourney General... "suddenly" proceedings against the vile creature in that video are 'dropped'.

Now 'that'.....is real racism.

So now Julia Gillard,barely a month in office is expected to clear the 50,000 illegals cluttering up the immigration services. Multiply &80,000 by 50,000 gives you the bill racked up by past governments.It's not as though you can sheet the entire problem to her. Be fair and give her a chance. It's a hell of a huge assignment. None of you d...heads would even comprehend the enormity of it. She may in part have been responsible for some but she is on the move and cant you see that she is trying.

socratease

<< …the language used by shock jocks and the Howard government about the boat people was pretty condemning: Illegals,criminals, invaders, terrorists, diseased, ragheads >>

Briar rose, this sort of language came from very few people as I recall. Of course shock jocks would use end-of-the-spectrum language and opinions in order to cause as much of a stir as possible. Members of the Howard government were considerably more restrained.

Being the strong language that it is, it sticks in the minds of people such as yourself, CJ and Jennifer [not a major criticism as I can understand why that would happen], while those who express gentler language don’t get remembered.

Briar, IMHO you are very wrong to associate such language with the majority of people who want to see the onshore asylum seeker issue brought to a close.

BTW, only one of your six words could be construed as racist.

<< Maybe Jennifer Wilson should give up writing satire and parody for OLO >>

Er, yes…if that’s what it was intended to be!

In her two posts, she (Seaspray) gave no indication of satire or parody. And as I expressed in my last post, that sort of language doesn’t work, and it doubly doesn’t work for you if you are knocking your detractors for using the same sort of language…unless it is very obvious that you are being satirical or parodical, which was certainly not the case with Jennifer’s article.

Amicus - cj "doesn't stop our.....

Some folk are not here to express any view than rant at the right of others to express their view.

Bearing that in mind and with regard to the likes of cj....

A few words of advise from my previous post

“They are the leftie swill, overdosing on personal self-loathing and they view their fellow Australians with contempt.

The more they are ignored, the better off we will be.”

Hi Col! More "Socialism by Stealth" from the "leftie swill", eh?

Suck it up, old son.

“They are the leftie swill, overdosing on personal self-loathing and they view their fellow Australians with contempt. The more they are ignored, the better off we will be.”

Ferdinand Marcos and Augusto Pinochet = For the People. Thanks for clearing that up, Stern.

Ludwig, a quote from the Solicitor General made in the High Court during the events of the Tampa period when he was arguing the Coalition's case for having various islands excised:

"Today, invasions don't have to be military...they can be of diseases, they can be of unwanted migrants"

The juxtaposition of diseases and unwanted migrants and invasion is no accident.

If you read the Senate Select Committee report "A Certain Maritime Incident" you will find evidence to the effect that Howard gave explicit instructions as to how the faces of the asylum seekers were to be kept out of photographs whenever possible so that Australians could be manipulated into seeing them as less than human. As faceless.

If you know anything about propaganda you will see the similarities in the language and actions of the Coalition, and the Nazi propaganda against Jews. Race hate is race hate. There's not much scope for interesting language and ideas.

<< "Today, invasions don't have to be military...they can be of diseases, they can be of unwanted migrants" >>

Briar rose, what is wrong with this?

It seems like a sensible comment from the Solicitor General. I’m sure he made it amongst many other points, not in isolation.

You seem to be seeing the worst in those that you disagree with. That’s nothing unusual, so it seems, throughout the history of this particular debate, and indeed throughout the history of humanity wherever there is any conflict or disagreement.

<< Howard gave explicit instructions as to how the faces of the asylum seekers were to be kept out of photographs whenever possible so that Australians could be manipulated into seeing them as less than human. >>

So that Australians could be manipulated into seeing them as less than human??

That’s a very strong interpretation of Howard’s motivation. You can’t assert that, briar.

Could it be that he simply saw it as sensible to keep their faces out of the media so that the whole issue remained a little less emotive, without in any way wanting to make those people on the boats seem any less human or any less deserving of getting their claims properly processed?

<< If you know anything about propaganda you will see the similarities in the language and actions of the Coalition, and the Nazi propaganda against Jews. Race hate is race hate. >>

Wow! That really is way over the top…. IMHO

"Could it be that he simply saw it as sensible to keep their faces out of the media so that the whole issue remained a little less emotive, without in any way wanting to make those people on the boats seem any less human or any less deserving of getting their claims properly processed? "

No, I really don't think that was his motive.

But you do grant me the point that seeing their faces would have been emotive.

Would the emotion aroused have been compassion or rage? Which one was Howard trying to avoid?

It's very hard to believe that he was trying to protect them from our anger.

My family came to this country as migrants in the late 1950's. I remember well the racist slogans that were written in the dust on our car. And we were "legal."

My parents were in work, not a drain on welfare. None of that protected us from racist slurs.

You keep missing the point Briar. Unlike you, most Australians
don't want unlimited open borders. Come up with any excuse
that you like, but that is where you and the rest of most
of the Australian community, have a fundamental difference of
opinion.

Jennifer states "They may be thousands of them in the western suburbs of Sydney, or in Queensland.

These 50,000 “illegals” are queue jumpers. That means they’ve ignored the proper processes legitimate migrants have to go through before they can call Australia home. They haven’t made their application and waited their turn in the line.

They shouldn’t be here. They’re taking Australian jobs, for less pay than Australians, no doubt, because it’s all in cash and under the counter. They are deceitful and disobedient, and they are living in hiding from the authorities.

They’re unlikely to do much good for the country because they can’t live a legal life here. They can’t build community. They can’t pay taxes. They can’t make any worthwhile contribution at all. They can only take.

Hardly qualifications for good citizenship. Hardly the type of person we want in our country"

Jennifer is right. What is the present government doing about it? Nothing! Illegal foreigners used to be detained and put on a plane out of Aus. Not any more, they are invited in for a chat and coffee and maybe given a bridging visa until they wish to leave.

http://www.news.com.au/national/no-detention-for-visa-dodgers/story-e6frfkvr-1225708050188

So not only has this government put out the welcome mat to entice illegal boat people to risk their lives, but no longer detains those illegals found to mock our system by overstaying.

But jennifer is wrong to say it is racist. It is simply incompedence and softness by this government.

“You keep missing the point Briar. Unlike you, most Australians
don't want unlimited open borders.”

It’s you who’s missing the point Yabby - again! I believe most Australians object to unlimited population considering this nation’s ecological degradation, the potential consequences of a changing climate and 10 bloody deserts!

The few refugees who make it to our shores, on rickety boats, make a small dent in the immigration programme, therefore we can continue honouring our humanitarian obligations without any significant burden on Australia's carrying capacity.

However, I'm all for significantly reducing the overall migrant intake, rounding up the overstayers and the criminals who infiltrate this country and deporting them forthwith - hasta la vista!

Humanitarian Programme 2008-2009:

refugees: 7102
Special Humanitarian: 4543
Onshore: 3209
Total: 14854

Net permanent additions to the resident population 08/09: 143,601
Permanent departures: 81,018

Thank you for a very logical article Jennifer Wilson.

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/immigration-update/update-jun09.pdf

*The few refugees who make it to our shores*

Ah Dickie, that is because in the past, it was made diffficult
to get to our shores. As we know from Europe and the US,
hundreds of thousands seek the cushy Western lifestyle.

Smart people tend to act and think through before events
happen. How many hundred thousand a year on leaky boats
will it take, for you to claim it is not a few? Would you
like me to charter the Queen Mary and bring more?

<< Ah Dickie, that is because in the past, it was made diffficult
to get to our shores. As we know from Europe and the US,
hundreds of thousands seek the cushy Western lifestyle. >>

Ah, the old boat people as economic immigrants furphy.

I guess it's not fear, but it's certainly loathing. What do you reckon, Ludwig - is Yabby's characterisation of boat arrivals fair comment or deliberate vilification of bona fide refugees?

"How many hundred thousand a year on leaky boats
will it take, for you to claim it is not a few? Would you
like me to charter the Queen Mary and bring more?"

Aw quit ya sookin' Yabby - you got here for 10 quid on an ocean liner!

I am looking forward to this being an election issue.

Every Voter should remember

Under a Liberal Coalition, there were no longer fleets of leaky boats full of people seeking economic improvement

Under the incumbent Socialist government the policy keeps changing and dysfunction reigns supreme whilst more and more boats arrive..

Gizzards does not have the moral backbone to admit her erros and accept the "Nauru option" because she stood against it when Howard initiated it and solved the problem.

Keep this issue up there and let the electorate decide

Do not let this issue be reduced to the whim of a bunch of refugee activists who demand our absolute, blind compliance with their stupid fixations

*Ah, the old boat people as economic immigrants furphy.*

No furphy CJ. Mexico to USA, Africa to Europe, Eastern Europe
to Western Europe. Hundreds of thousands of people each
year risking their lives to obtain the cushy lifestyle.

If you haven't yet figured out that money is a driver of
human behaviour, then you are even more stupid then
you appear to be :)

[Deleted for abuse and poster suspended]

Yabby,

'Cushy life style' ? What immigrant group has ever slipped quickly into a 'cushy life style' ? Invariably, they have had to do the hard, dirty, boring and dangerous jobs for at least a generation, so that luckier Australians like you (or more likely your parents) could escape from them and move up the economic ladder to .... a cushy life style ?

Seriously - have you ever tried hard labour, Yabby ?

Migrants have earnt their right to some comfort the hard way - they didn't steal anybody else's land, or exploit imported slave labour.

Nobody in Australia has a monopoly right to 'cushy life styles'. Not even you, Yabby.

Joe

[Deleted for abuse]

Julian Burnside started it all with this little quip:
“ It would take about 20 years to fill the MCG with boat arrivals”

Then the Protagonist tried to parrot it, but couldn't quite the get words right:
“The few refugees who make it to our shores, on rickety boats, make a small dent in the immigration programme, therefore we can continue honouring our humanitarian obligations without any significant burden on Australia's carrying capacity”

But what they both don’t seem to know is -- it takes a only few boatloads to create a no-go area in some of our suburbs -like this:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/angry-crowd-turns-on-police-in-four-hour-standoff/story-e6freuy9-1225770832587

and even fewer to produce this:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/sydney-army-base-suicide-strike-was-imminent/story-e6freuy9-1225757788303

But of course it couldn't happen again--all our boat people are now poor, hard done by, genuine refugees!
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/asylum-seeker-linked-to-al-qaida/story-e6frg6nf-1225891385695
“We learned from Detachment 88 (Indonesia's specialist anti-terror police squad) that at least one mobile phone held by this group of 11 Afghans had been used to contact senior al-Qa'ida figures,"
http://www.isria.com/pages/16_July_2010_76.php
“In an interview with a group of Tamil asylum-seekers, an Indonesian community worker said, they confessed that they are members of the Tamil Tiger guerilla fighters. They left their country to seek political asylum in Australia, The Jakarta Globe reported”

Or, could it?

"The poms fitted in immediately & the Europeans were from Modern, Western, Christian, Capitalist, Democracies, so they only had to learn English & then fitted in immediately."

No, not all Formersnag. A high number of ‘poms’ returned to the UK after their mandatory two year stay, unable to withstand the Aussie taunts.

“The Muslim Terrorists will never fit in until "Whitey" has been bred out of existence or enslaved.”

Well hellooooo….- nor will the Utasha, Nazi fascists, Moonie, Ku Klux Klan, Christian extremist etc etc terrorists fit in until the 'enemy' has been obliterated.

Christians and Capitalists ‘fitted in?” Ah that must be why Australia let in the war criminals - Gestapo informers and junior ministers in Nazi puppet governments. Liberal Senator Abetz acknowledged too that his great uncle, Otto Abetz was a Nazi superior, convicted in France of war crimes in 1945, having sent thousands of French jews to their deaths.

Then we had the roots of Utasha, a Fascist organisation in Catholic Croatia, infiltrating Australia in the ‘50s. An enthusiastic partner of the Nazis in the Jewish holocaust, the Utasha sympathisers entered post-war Australia with ease.

So political terror came not from the Left but the Right. On New Year's Day, 1967, an explosion ripped through the Yugoslav Consulate in Sydney, the climax of a wave of attacks on Yugoslav property going back to 1963. By 1970, bombs had torn through the Melbourne consulate, Yugoslav clubs, businesses, churches and homes too.

The very Catholic Calabrian Mafia and their hit men have been operating in this nation for sixty years – murder, mayhem, graft and corruption!

Aum and Mahikari sects (sarin gas nutters), who managed to infiltrate outback Australia are offshoots of covert Japanese God-Emperor worship groups and their terrorist actions are to aid their particular Japanese brand of world hegemony.

It was revealed that Jo Court, the wife of then Liberal Premier Richard Court, had been a member of the Mahikari sect for fifteen years. How embarrassing and for you too Formersnag since none of these cretins happened to be Muslim terrorists.

[Deleted for abuse. Poster suspended.]

I am still curious about the assertion that the 50,000 overstayers not being brought to account is an issue of racism. What we need is some breakdown of the nationalities of these overstayers. Seaspray, as you have clearly done a bit of research in this area, could you please help us out? It seems to me that it could only be an issue of racism if we are turning a blind eye to one or two groups while ousting the rest.

Leigh raised this issue, noting that many of the overstayers who are deported are white Europeans - these are, however, the ones who are deported, not the ones who get away with it. It was disappointing of briar rose to misquote Leigh with this statement:

<<"Many overstayers are white Europeans" - exactly. Proves the author's point that they aren't being pursued and deported like the non-white, non-Europeans.>>

This runs against Leigh's point - these are the people who ARE being pursued and deported.

Nonetheless, I'm interested to see more. While your article was interesting, I don't think you have demonstrated with any clarity how the overstayers/boat people issue constitutes racism.

<< While your article was interesting, I don't think you have demonstrated with any clarity how the overstayers/boat people issue constitutes racism. >>

Agreed Oto. Jennifer’s racism slur is totally out of place.

The repeated use of this word knocks the stuffing out of what would otherwise be a much more interesting article. It gives the reader the strong impression that the author is quite unbalanced and therefore very likely to be presenting her views with a strong bias. The racism slur works very strongly against Jennifer’s integrity in this article.

Having said that, of course Jennifer is right - our government should be tackling the issue of visa overstayers decisively.

They could do it so easily and at much less expense than building a new processing centre in East Timor for example, I would think.

It is terribly sloppy for our government to abuse our national rule of law to such blatant and ongoing extent as they are with visa overstayers. In fact, this is the main issue here. We’ve got a discreet set of rules, but our authorities are just allowing them to be infringed enormously.

Visa overstayers are not a huge problem, as the number in the country is more or less constant. It is not as if we are getting 50 000 per annum in a cumulative manner. They spend money and contribute to economic turnover. They are not costing us a huge amount of money to process or to catch and deport or anything.

But yes, the policing of our visa rules needs to be much improved, or the rules need to be brought in line with accepted practice, or some combination of these things.

And it would be appropriate for Gillard to hop to it, as her [hopefully] decisive dealings with onshore asylum seekers certainly does sit in strong contrast to the non-action on fly-in overstayers.

Oto,
I posted this link before but here it is again.

http://www.news.com.au/national/no-detention-for-visa-dodgers/story-e6frfkvr-1225708050188

You will notice that there are many nationalities which puts paid to Jennifers claim of racism. It is simply incompedence by this government.
More info on DIAC webbsite if you care to look.

Thanks for the laugh CJ!!

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse and poster suspended.]

Deeeear oh dear oh dear!

{ :> ()

[Deleted for abuse and poster suspended]

[Deleted for abuse. Poster suspended.]

[Deleted for abuse]

CJ, go back to bed! Then in an hour or three, wake up and get out of the other side!

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted for abuse]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted]

[Deleted for abuse.]

[Deleted]

This is really horrible - stop fighting everybody!

[Deleted for abuse]

I have deleted a number of comments above and suspended some of those involved in the brawl. Any further agressive comments on this thread, or any other, will be dealt with severely.

Whew!

Dodged a bullet there.

Rusty

It's a massacre!

Confirms my decission not to bother responding to some posters.

I see things have not changed one iota here on the forum when racism is the topic of discussion. A real pity that people's real identities are not openly shown.

Rainier

"A real pity that people's real identities are not openly shown"

How about you set the ball rolling by revealing yours, and others may decide to follow suit!

Rainier,
You are wrong old chap.

This author is simply using 'racism' as an attention gatherer and in doing so cites racism as a reason for opposition to the illegal boat arrivals, which is incorrect.

Almost everybody that opposes the entry of the illegals does so because they are con artists that are gate crashing Aus.

It is good to see your comments again but how about you give us your views on how to stop the boats from coming, if need be, and further your views on immigration policy.

But if you do that you could leave yourself open to accusations of racism by others. Better to sit quiet and just make the odd one liner.

Amicus... You said: "Just who signed up to these International Agreements, and what rights do they have to do so .. it is obvious that the majority of Australians - who everyone including the UN says is racist, did not agree to this."

From memory, a bunch of Australians fought and died in a rather large war, commonly referred to as World War II, so that agreements like this could come into fruition.

It is also mentioned in our National Anthem in the second verse, if you ever care to read the lyrics a proud Aussie like yourself belts out when remembering the fallen from aforementioned war:

"For those who've come across the seas
We've boundless plains to share"

So yes, you can blame real Australians who fought and died for this country, and the real Australians they left behind, for signing up to these agreements.

You are a child, basically asking: "why should we do it if they don't?"

There are so many insanely stupid, poorly informed and illogical arguments in this forum, for BOTH sides. So I decided to join up and play with you guys :)

Trash

TrashcanMan,
“There are so many insanely stupid, poorly informed and illogical arguments in this forum, for BOTH sides. So I decided to join up and play with you guys :)"

Indeed TCM, I can see that you are well practised at playing -- though I suspect most of your endeavours have been for self entertainment.

“It is also mentioned in our National Anthem in the second verse, if you ever care to read the lyrics a proud Aussie like yourself belts out when remembering the fallen from aforementioned war:

'For those who've come across the seas
We've boundless plains to share'"

Aye, but therein lies the rub TCM -- the invite says share our "plains" --- but the blighters all want to crowd into a metropolis.

The emigrés to OZ settle rarely on the plain.
Preferin' Sidney, Melborn …or Brisbain.

Horus,

Semantics my friend. But point taken. It also, however, elicits the question: Why the hell do we need to process them off-shore? We have boundless fricken plains (and people without jobs)! The reasons for doing it off-shore are purely political (i.e. assuring the rednecks that no filthy refugees set foot on our sacred turf) and have no real benefit compared to the massive increase in logistical costs.

tcm .. that's a long bow to draw, that Australians fought and died in WWII so that UN agreements could be agreed to by political appointees without the knowledge or agreement of the people sometime in the future .. and that they are not reviewed over time.

You appear to be serious about this, which just beggars belief that you actually think this is a reasonable argument.

On our national anthem, when did Australians agree that the words of a song should be interpreted as legal basis for unlawful immigration. Are there other words in the national anthem you'd like to become the basis for legislation?

"You are a child, basically asking: "why should we do it if they don't?" "

UN agreements are frequently referred to by immigration activists as a "sound reasoning" of why we should accept people who come uninvited to Australia - I have no problem taking people who have waited patiently for years in refugee camps in say Kosovo or some other hellhole coming to Australia as a UN sponsored immigrant. My problem is with the likes of yourself berating me and others that the same UN agreement means people can come here who are clearly con men and sneaks. That argument makes me want to review and even dispense with UN agreements, and have our own agreements, that can change to reflect what is reasonable at different times.

You're trying to trivialize arguments into little bite sized phrases to sum up an opponent's argument. I don't know where you've "played" before but this isn't a great place for trolls.

Don't call people names here, you won't last long .. so don't call me a child, I don't like it OK? I'm probably older than you and certainly more mature. When you refer to soldiers dying, be careful not to trivialize their lives by referring to them the way you do.

Are you a soldier, have you ever been one?

You call yourself Trash .. from some sort of bravado I assume, it does reflect your contribution very well.

I think we'll leave the name calling at one all now, thanks guys. I did hesitate over the allegation of childishness, but it just escaped. Won't next time. And if you're not aware TCM, I'm the moderator.

My apologies, Amicus, I was making a behaviourial comparison... You're obviously not a child,. I'll watch my wording in future.

Of course, refugees arriving on boat are "clearly con-men and sneaks" though, aren't they? Unfortunately, they're not here to defend themselves against name-calling like you are. As far as I'm aware, ~90%+ are found to be genuine refugees.

Unlawful immigration? What unlawful immigration? They are arriving on our shores seeking asylum... Perfectly legal. Whether you like it or not, we have signed these UN agreements and therefore should be bound by them. Australians are, as I understand it, people who stick by their word. We are also the country of "the fair go". Besides, how can we expect "rogue" countries like Nth Korea to respect international law if we crap on it ourselves.

People overstaying visas, that's unlawful. Whether there is a racist driver behind the focus on boat people rather than overstayers... I don't think so.

TrashcanMan

“I'll watch my wording in future”

We’ll hold you to that promise!

OK, what word would you use to describe these guys?
"We learned from Detachment 88 (Indonesia's specialist anti-terror police squad) that at least one mobile phone held by this group of 11 Afghans had been used to contact senior al-Qa'ida figures," he said.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/asylum-seeker-linked-to-al-qaida/story-e6frg6nf-1225891385695

And what word would you use to describe this group?
“They travelled to Islamabad, some staying in the al-Hira Hotel, before flying to Indonesia in late October. Even though they were all Afghans, they obtained valid visas to Indonesia by posing as a Quetta business delegation with the apparent endorsement of the Quetta Chamber of Commerce.”
http://www.smh.com.au/national/revealed-smuggler-arrested-over-gangs-plot-to-ship-afghans-here-20100711-105p8.html

Or, even, this guy?
“On that visit the third since arriving in Australia as a boat person in 2001”
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/its_like_a_jew_going_back_to_hitlers_germany_for_a_holiday_or_not_really

One word that might be appropriate is , UNLUCKY.

PS here’s a look at what on-shore processing of asylum seekers would look like (give it a minute) :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeSgBL7gpAk

Horus,

You've picked out a couple of examples out of thousands of people. Weak, weak, weak.

Guilty until proven innocent? Is that your idea of the 'Australian Way'?

The fact is, we, as a civilised, advanced nation, should be treating people humanely, and we should be respecting international laws we have agreed to. If not, we are just a bunch of hypocrits.

TrashcanMan

<< You've picked out a couple of examples out of thousands of people. Weak, weak, weak >>

No,No,No.

--If the Afghanis posing as the Quetta business delegation had changed into their poor-fellow-me-civvies and boarded a boat, they would have morphed into just another boatload of unwashed needy refugees –and would likely have been ushered into OZ (even if they had, as a grande finale, blown up their boat at great risk to OZ defence force personnel!)

--If the group with the al-Quada phone had thrown it overboard with their papers ( of course, after they had used it to make a triple 000 rescue call from off the WA coast)- Who could establish that they were anything but innocents’?

---If our refugee frequent flyer to Kabul had gone onto one of the many ABC panels and testified of his well-founded fear of persecution, and dire need to escape to OZ --Who would have been so uncivilised or inhumane to have challenged the veracity of his story?

Your Tennyson-esque weak, weak, weak, does come into --but only in relation to our assessment processes.

"Fleeing war to a hotbed of paranoia". As Patrick McGorry said in the media this week, Policy on asylum seekers is being driven by emotion and appearance when hard-nosed pragmatism is needed.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/fleeing-war-to-a-hotbed-of-paranoia-20100722-10mwf.html

and,

"Don't blame asylum seekers on congestion"

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/dont-blame-asylum-seekers-on-congestion-20100722-10mi3.html

Some common sense at last - in the fray?

May we get somewhere, as 'fair-go' Australian's on this issue.

http://www.miacat.com/

“Don't blame asylum seekers on congestion"

Aye! and I don’t blame the shoppers in this vid either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnyRm6htkPY

If you’ve been advertising : “COME ON DOWN –HAVE WE GOT A DEAL FOR YOU!”

What would you expect, eh ?

The only way to stop the mad --ME FIRST – stampede is to stop the advertising, make it harder to find a bargain, and cut the never say no sales approach.

I think that video was taken just as the ALP came to power and the word was out that immigration rules had been relaxed.
Kevin and Julia have so many friends that want to come and visit them.

Horus,

You're still labelling a group of people based on a very small percentage of them being caught as bad apples.

Priests, scout leaders, swimming coaches... Are you saying they're all paedofiles who are just lucky they haven't been caught?

I could go on..

TCM,

<<“Priests, scout leaders, swimming coaches... Are you saying they're all paedofiles who are just lucky they haven't been caught?”>>

At least the Priests, scout leaders, swimming coaches etc have a past – their past can be checked & cross-checked with a high degree of accuracy.

Your “refugees” in most cases are unknowns –I’d suggest that unless they do something REEAAALY DUMB --- we have no way of ruling then out. And often, even when they do do something really dumb –they can,still, after appealing again and again and again (at other peoples expense, of course!)squeeze through.


It’s not that there are only a few bad apples –it’s a case of us not knowing how many bad apples we bought.

That’s why we see things like this --over sixty years after acceptance http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/stories/s71308.htm

Amicus, I guess that explains all of the terrorist activity we're experiencing in Australia at the moment. All those damn refugees we let in without checking who they were.

What is it the government is doing spending a minimum of two years processing their applications?

TCM,

>> I guess that explains all of the terrorist activity we're experiencing in Australia at the moment. All those damn refugees we let in without checking who they were<<

I don’t know about “all” –but it certainly might account for a good part of it .

I’ll let them speak for themselves:

“It is two years since a Somali community leader in Sydney, Herse Hilole, warned that young Somali refugees in Melbourne were returning to Somalia to fight and could be recruited for attacks in Australia”

http://www.watoday.com.au/national/open-gate-to-terrorists-20090805-e8x1.html

>>What is it the government is doing spending a minimum of two years processing their applications?<<

"'The authorities wasted days trying to figure out if somebody actually came from Somalia, and had not lived in Kenya, and had not stayed in Germany. And ultimately these people stayed because Germany wasn't willing to take them back, Kenya wasn't willing to take them back,' she says"

"At the time, she told the Dutch authorities she was fleeing the war in Somalia but later publicly admitted she had lied."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/hirsi-ali-urges-refugee-testing/story-fn59niix-1225896772924

Amicus,

Could happen, true. Hasn't happened yet. And besides, the Somalis mentioned weren't necessarily even boat people.

An Australian born man could also grab a swag of guns and kill a bunch of innocents in Port Arthur too. Oh, hang on... that DID happen. Should we stop births in Australia too? The risk is obviously much higher considering the amount of ACTUAL EVENTS that have occurred compared to mere SPECULATION.

And once again, singling out individual cases out of a few thousand asylum seekers is hardly convincing to me. Sorry.

TCM what's this thing with "Amicus"?
Twice now you've called me "Amicus"
The first time I let it pass

Not that there's anything wrong with Amicus! he's an excellent poster --a fine name and fine character -but he aint me!

I can only think it must be a sign of you being punch drunk,
as in, I've hit you too many times with head shots!

<< And besides, the Somalis mentioned weren't necessarily even boat people>>
I never said they were!

Very sorry about that.

cheers for the discussion though :)