Because the french are idiots, doesn't mean we should be.

Bonjour,

@Yabby: We’re moving into intriguing but unrelated areas, so will pass on responding. We agree on many – sheep industry, trade surplus, private borrowing and trade barriers. May pursue these elsewhere.

On current matters, refugees languishing in camps are suffering. Certainly. But not facing torture or execution or both. Important distinction.

Boat people then face enormous risks from criminal smugglers, treacherous oceans and pirates. Those found not genuine are sent home.

@SPQR: You showed links naming four Muslims of dubious character.

I then referred to links naming 44 outstanding Moslems. Including writers Randa Abdel-Fattah and Irfan Yusuf, broadcaster Waleed Aly, actor Osamah Sami, AFL footballer Bachar Houli, Test cricketer Usman Khawaja, rugby’s Hazem El-Masri, Australia Post CEO Ahmed Fahour, Crazy John the mobile phone man and Ed Husic MP.

Can name others. So, I said I would see your four and raise you 40.

You wrote: “Do the maths again Alan. This link alone [to an article in The Australian, December 2007] talks of *DOZENS* of young jihadis returning to fight for al-Shabaab. How did you ever get it down to “four”?

Well, SPQR, I got the number four from your linked articles which named only four suspects.

Now, if you want to refer to *DOZENS* of Muslims – not named – who allegedly returned to activism in Somalia, then I will refer to 400,000-plus Australian Muslims who love their kids, work at their jobs, pay taxes, boost the economy with production and spending, stand for local government and mostly vote Labor (first generation) or Liberal (second generation).

So I will see your *DOZENS* and raise you 400,000.

A couple of tips, SPQR:

One of your sources was The Australian. Never believe anything you read in any Murdoch publication, except sports results and arts reviews. Almost certainly untrue or seriously distorted.

One source was from 2005, another from 2007. The whole point of the current reforms is to put those bad old days behind us.

And finally, SPQR, I’m going with the figures from the Refugee Council. They have nothing to gain by fudging them, do they?

Cheers, AA

@Alan,

<< You showed links naming four Muslims of dubious character>>

No Alan, I showed links to numerous *individuals* who had made a mockery of what is often touted as our *strict vetting processes*.
And who showed (continue to show) no love for our liberal democratic values.

<< So I will see your *DOZENS* and raise you 400,000.>>

Again, Alan, I need to remind you this is not about Muslims – despite your best efforts to derail the thread – it's about shonks.

<< One of your sources was The Australian. Never believe anything you read in any Murdoch publication…Almost certainly untrue or seriously distorted.>>

Maybe, but funnily enough, here's the same story on the ABC!
“A religious scholar claims young Somali-Australians, who've gone to Somalia to fight with the terrorist group al-Shebaab, have returned and are living in Australia.”
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2009/s2693680.htm

<<One source was from 2005, another from 2007. The whole point of the current reforms is to put those bad old days behind us>>
LOL
I asked you once before if Alan Austin was “a nom de plume of Julia Gillard?” At the time you assure me it wasn’t but that last quip was straight out of the *REAL JULIA* handbook. Mindful as I (as we all are) that Julia is economical with the truth, I ask again …are you sure you are not Julia Gillard?

It will take a lot more than the (re)opening of Club Med branches on Nauru and Manus to stop the shonks.

<<the Refugee Council...have nothing to gain by fudging them, do they?>>

The Refugee Council document was crafted in such as way as to make OZ appear to be deficient (and it certainly took you in, ay? : “Australia last year resettled fewer refugees than did Liberia, Kenya, Tunisia, Ethiopia, South Sudan, Yemen and Israel.Are you proud of that .. ?)

“They have nothing to gain”—They actually have millions & millions & millions of things to gain!
Because that is the extend of their govt funding each year.
No constant inflow of “asylum seekers”: No funding , and ergo, No more Refugee Council!

*Those found not genuine are sent home.*

Oh come on Alan, you arn't really that gullible, are you? I remind you what Mexicans risk, in trying to get to the USA, to live
"the good life". We have had journalists travel to Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, North Africa and they interview people. They openly admit that the word is out, they want a better life, so send their kids on boats to Aus, or try to get across to Italy, Spain, then on to France. The UN Convention is 60 years old and so full of holes,
its laughable. Now you are complaining that France has too many,
because you have been such suckers.

Europe really has gotten itself into this mess itself, now you want us to do the same. Look at the mess in Holland, Denmark, England,
France, Spain, Greece, etc.

If my life was threatened, I would be quite happy just to escape and
get over some border. Not go window shopping for a rich country, half way around the world. I would be happy in any camp, (I've lived in army camps), not try and burn it down. I would be happy to be alive, if my life was threatened, not list demands and complain.

Australia would be foolish to make the same mistakes as you lot did.

*Iran ranks first worldwide in terms of having the largest number of road accidents with 38,000 deaths and injuries per year. Other sources place the total number of fatalities at 100,000 over the past 6 years or 20,000 per year on average (2008).*

Alan, the above snip is from Wickipedia. In other words, a person is far more likely to get killed by risking travelling on Iran's roads, then by having their life threatened by anyone. But if 3 Iranians
were shot somewhere, you would point it out to me, as a major drama.

Hello again SPQR, Yabby, Chris, Mr Minister and others,

Not sure if there are questions there. If you have any, I’m happy to attempt answers, as you may have observed.

Meanwhile, one for you all:

Envisage an amazing holiday for you and your spouse / lover and your two favourite nephews, both of whom coincidentally are medical students. You are in this idyllic spot on the remote coast of Western Australia having decided to immerse yourselves totally in the wilderness – no phones, no internet, no two-way radio, no contact with the rest of civilisation.

Seriously remote.

On an early morning stroll along the deserted beach you find a boat about to be washed ashore, holding an extended family of nine starving, dehydrated Muslims, three of whom are injured, two critically, and two others deceased. Four of the nine are children.

One of the children in broken English explains they were attacked in their home country for their religious beliefs and were fleeing for their lives. They plead with you to take them to your house – there is nowhere else for 200 miles in any direction – and to provide medical care, food and water.

You, your partner and your strapping young nephews have the strength to haul in the boat and carry the injured to safety, and then bury the dead. You also have the strength to push the boat back beyond the surf where they will all perish. Or you could just run away – which would obviously leave the family to perish on the beach.

Everyone is looking to you. Your call. What is your decision, and why?

But here’s the catch: Australia has already accepted its quota of refugees for this year.

So what do you do?