Hehe Alan, so you tell me to read accurate information, and then
give me an article by an author of the refugee action coalition!

I prefer unbiased information, not dogma.

Yes Fox is biased, I don't watch it. But clearly some of your
sources are biased too. Fact is that with the internet, there are many
sources and anyone is free to explore them to form an opinion.

In my late teens I actually spent about 18 months living in France,
so I know a fair bit about the place. But today, with two satelite
dishes and a myriad of channels from all over the place, I can
choose to be very well informed indeed, better than many who
travel and only see a tiny part of a country or continent.

But given your sources of information, you have of course revealed
just how biased your own opinion is. Not too much objectivity there,
I am afraid.

@Alan,

Why do I get the impression that you’ve found one of those refugee activists websites with the catechism-like question and answer pages --put there to provide ready made responses for those who can’t think for themselves -- and are now slowly working you’re way through the prefabbed excuses trying to justify your preconceived position?

Just look at some of the clangers you’ve tried on:
1) “Australia last year *resettled* fewer refugees than did Liberia, Kenya, Tunisia, Ethiopia, South Sudan, Yemen and Israel.Are you proud of that .. ?)
And when that was debunked ( i.e. it was pointed out you had been had by a clever piece of propaganda ) -- you tried this on

2) Gee whiz, look at all the exemplary citizens who has come to us as refugees.
And when it was pointed out there was an equal or greater number of shonks –you moved on to

3) What if a poor family got ship wrecked on the coast –or, if they were a white farming family from Zimbabwe – would you not throw open you arms, NO?
And when it was pointed out to you that we are much more likely to have washed up a ship load of streetwise young men in Calvin Kliens and Nikes with iphones -- YES! You retreated to

4) What about this piece from Eva Cox (which I found on (rabid leftwing website) New Matilda : don’t go quoting from the Murdoch press SPQR , but hey, I can quote from New Matilda or Malcolm!)

@Alan,

And some of the lines you have come out with still have me ROFLAO

“the Refugee Council… have nothing to gain by fudging them, do they?””
Well, yes, they do...only the matter of tens of million$ govt funding each year!

I figure you must be on about excuse number 203 by now… only another 2003 to go!

Yes, Alan, we do send “asylum seekers” home.
But only those dumb enough to tell the wrong story

<<“Australia gives citizenship if you have a good story… They will know you are lying, but as long as you say the same thing whatever they ask you, you will be fine.">>
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/18/afghanistan-people-smugglers-taliban-europe

The fourth reality is that Australia can and should accept far more refugees than it does at present: Whilst this kind of insensitive overpopulation has permanently destroyed the Murray Darling food bowl.

And the fifth reality is that Australia can and should export far more coal than it does at present: Whilst bigger carbon taxes are applied at home to prove Australia is environmentally responsible.

The 100th reality is Australia is a shizophrenics and LIARS paradise.

Our politicians and captains of industry and commerce are the best at it. They're motivated by greed which laughs at truth and treats its electors like animals.

They call this nation building and that's:

The sixth reality .. its a taxpayer funded JOKE!

Hello again Yabby,

Don't mean to sound like a broken record, but you are doing it again. I raised the matter of falsification of data - and you respond with bias. They are not the same categories, are they, Yabby?

Were you wagging it the day your logic teacher taught category errors at school? If so, you are forgiven. I understand.

Hi again SPQR,

Excellent questions.

But before I respond to them, just two quick questions for you. Follow-up questions really:

1. How many tens of millions of dollars of government funding does the Refugee Council receive, to the nearest ten million?

2. And how many illegal immigrants were sent back home from Australia in 2011-12?

Was it:
(a) 10
(b) 117
(c) 392, or
(d) more than 10,000?

Back tomorrow ...

Cheers, AA

@Alan,

<< Excellent questions.. But before I respond to them, just two quick questions for you. Follow-up questions really:>>

LOL

Err, Alan, you have *already* responded!
It wasn’t a case of you missing the questions.
It was rather a case that your responses were pure piffle.

And now you have retreated to game playing:

I’m thinking of a number…
Now it’s between 10 an 10,000…
and if you can’t guess the number I am thinking of, you lose!

It sounds very much like you are building up to tell me that the majority of illegals actually arrive here by plane and are from affluent countries (its usually about excuse no. 204 on the list!)

Sorry, Alan, I have got time to play a numbers game.
How about you tell us the relevance of it.