Bruce this rant is not even a disguised version of I hate the LNP and love the ALP. I wonder we have to read your sanctimonious bleating which is all just biased rubbish.
Rudd is all good? Remember he is supposedly the leader of our country and the Libs are all bad and its all their fault!
Honestly this is beyond a joke.

the lack of compassion towards those waiting in refugee camps and those who have paid to be drowned by Bruce and the left is astounding. Mr Rudd does not care what policy he has as long as he can be elected. Labour have been shown to be chief hypocrites changing every doctrine they have before having to admit they were wrong about the people smuggling trade, global warming and squandaring a huge surplus. Now they are getting 'tough 'on people smugglers, dropped the carbon tax and are going to be fiscal consersatives in order to pay the decades of debt they have created. Oh that's right they are also now in favour of 'gay ' marriage. How anyone could defend their hypocrisy really just shows their hatred for Abbott. At least his policies have been consistent as shown by Labour pretending to adopt them.

Thanks for the article, Bruce. It must be achieving something, if such constructive critics as JBowyer feel they have to read it.

There is a minority of voters who share your opposition to a policy built on deterrence. I am one of them. From this point of view, comparisons like apartheid are easy to make, but I am conscious that they just don't gel with people who hated apartheid and yet support the deterrence response to boat people.

I think Australians are stuck in a spiral of prohibition here. As a point of collective psychology, Morrison's declaring the 'war on people smuggling' shows how much this situation feels to many like the equally unrealistic 'war on drugs' that we are still struggling to bring to an end. All the drownings just serve to make tighter prohibition feel more urgent.

As we saw through the war on drugs, when prevention fails it is natural that people will want to crank up the deterrence. And when that fails, they will want to crank it up further. We have to accept this is largely a response in good faith, like people struggling to cope with the heroin traders next door. But real leadership would be to recognise this escalating cycle for what it is, and find a different way.

Quote "The ‘policies’, recently announced by both major parties, do not make us feel good about ourselves"

Please be so kind as to use the correct English words especially in the first sentence, I have corrected it for you.

"The ‘policies’, recently announced by both major parties, does not make me feel good." ** NOTE I have changed it to your opinion not everyone's **

At no point did you ask me or approx 20 million other Australians before you included us in your statement.

I do back anything the Government does to STOP the Economic Invaders.

The $60 million dollars damage on Nauru could have built a nice school in Australia, it was a premeditated thing they packed all there things and removed them from the buildings before the riot

Time to grow up Bruce. You have obviously spent too much time in the privileged elite world to have any idea of how the real people of Oz live.

Far too many are working too hard, & are too close to the bone to have much if any sympathy for the bludgers who are gate crashing our borders, chewing up our welfare, public housing & legal aid funds, when they can't get access themselves.

I know it would be hard for you, but go spend a few days in the mortgage belt, looking at how these people struggle to survive. Better still, try living on a checkout chicks income, with a couple of kids for a few months, them talk. Otherwise you are just a waste of space & generating a great deal of hot CO2, for no good reason.

Thank you Mr. Bruce Haigh for sharing your thoughts with the On Line Opinion community. Unfortunately, refugee policy is not the only area where Labor and the LNP have harsh, discriminatory and unsustainable policy positions which harm Australia's image and reputation on the world stage and dumb down the democratic process for the sake of chasing votes from red-necks.

Australia's policy on Macedonia is a case in point where both the Rudd Government and the Opposition lack the political courage and honesty to do what is right and recognise the Republic of Macedonia under its constitutional name as guaranteed by the UN Charter and has been done by over 135 countries at the UN including the USA, Canada, Britain, China, Russia, Indonesia etc. etc. .

Australia deserves better leaders and sensible policies. The upcoming federal election is a good time to elect new talent.

Your not feeling good Mr Haig because of the way you think and act. The more refugees we get in this country the better we will develop this country of mainly desert. The country particularly the desert parts that have had nothing done with them at all, needs thousands of helpers from Iran and Iraq and other desert dwellers to develop and show us how to develop this arid lands of ours. Because we in this country have done very little to develop the country for everyone including our Aboriginal brothers and sisters since we have ever been here, for over 200 hundred years now.

I don't like you Mr Haig, because you and your types are just spoilt brats, and never done a days work in your lives.

People who arrive by air have a passport and a visa ie an identity unlike those that discard their documents when arriving illegally by boat. If people contravene the conditions of their visa they are deported to their point of departure so to compare those that arrive by boat with those that arrive by air is rubbish.
How many refugees would you accept Bruce? A 100,000, a 1,000,000? What happens when your quota is full?

JBowyer writes: “Bruce this rant is not even a disguised version of I hate the LNP and love the ALP”

It’s amazing how some manage to get so immersed in the faux rivalry between Tweedledum and Tweedledee. Far from “I love the ALP” Bruce Haigh wrote (in the context of a lot of twaddle equating the Howard anti-refugee war to Boer fascism): “Our political process has been poisoned by an artificial crisis created by John Howard and milked by him and his successor Tony Abbott for everything it is worth. To try and cut Abbott off at the pass Rudd has had to resort to tactics that dive lower than Abbott.” Not too ALP-loving!

Howard has form with creation of artificial crises based on lies. Exceeding the “children overboard” lies he and his gang poured forth a tissue then a deadly drumbeat of Iraqi WMD lies building a case for an invasion that flouted the same laws that Hitler broke in invading Poland. He later blamed the intelligence community, and vilified the only spook who had the decency to break ranks and tell the truth. That’s Howard. That’s the Libs. Beside that, the rest is small change.

But Indonesia is not our country, why do people always insist that we can use other countries to do our work? Using Indonesia is no different to using Manus or Nauru because we still refuse then to accept the refugees while we pretend to be helping refugees in camps.

We do not help any refugees in camps, so with the refugees in camps mob just leave it alone.

The fact is we just have to accept that it is perfectly legal to sail here to seek protection, stop the apartheid prisons and just treat everyone the same.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/die-somewhere-else-20130726-2qq3s.html

Second, offshore resettlement programs can be subtly biased in favour of those who know

how to work bureaucratic systems. Form 80 from the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, to be completed ''neatly in English using block letters'', states that ''if you are applying for a refugee/humanitarian visa you must provide all addresses for the last 30 years (both month and year are required with no gaps)'' - not so hard for a bureaucrat, but not so easy for a

non-literate widow.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/die-somewhere-else-20130726-2qq3s.html#ixzz2aVdVP500

Marilyn Shepherd - You skate around the truth with such style, just to put a little truth into your argument.

Australian taxpayers do financially support some refugees in Indonesia that have been found to be genuine but are waiting there turn, which incidentally gets longer with the arrival of the Economic Invaders also coming from Indonesia.

A Quote from your link "While this would be more expensive, the notion that Australia is just too poor to contemplate such a system is simply ludicrous, especially when one looks at far poorer countries that accept vastly more refugees than Australia does.

An absolutely deceptive statement because those other poorer countries GIVE THEM NOTHING NOT 1 CENT, the refugees in the poor countries are supported by us and other countries.

Just how many Economic Invaders disguised as refugees do you think we should accept?

Julian I cannot let you get away with that nonsense. The "Refugees" held their children in the air to show them to our Navy and then scuttled the boat. So the Children certainly went overboard and it was all those rotten little pirates fault. JH was not to blame one iota and frankly Haigh should leave his 5 star life and talk to the normal ordinary Australian and find we are sick to death of these miserable scum trying it on.
Boat with 200 people sinks and the only ones to die are women and children? Just the sort of people Haig wants? Well the majority of us do not agree. Roll on the election!

J Bowyer, no refugees scuttled any boat, the girl from the navy who was on the vessel said the man was asking for mercy by showing the navy were shooting at a boat with children on board.

AS the refugees concerned are now
Australian citizens perhaps you should be silent.

@ Marilyn

WHY DO YOU FIND IT NECESSARY TO LIE?

one of the surprising and disappointing things about refugee advocates --who are want to talk about morality & doing the right thing -- is their own lack of scruples.

Here is Marilyn at it: <<We do not help any refugees in camps, so with the refugees in camps mob just leave it alone>>

A TOTAL --AND-- UTTER LIE!

And here is the proof:

--"The Australian Government has announced that they will be contributing an additional $21.5 million in humanitarian assistance for people affected by the conflict in Syria."
https://www.oxfam.org.au/2013/07/australian-government-increases-aid-for-syrian-crisis/

--"Australia has committed $5 million to the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) to provide food, medical assistance, water, shelter and protection for up to 245,000 refugees fleeing Sudan due to ongoing violence"
--"Australia has provided more than $198 million in humanitarian and development assistance in Sudan and South Sudan since 2004."
http://ministers.dfat.gov.au/marles/releases/2013/rm_mr_130128.html

"The purpose of the evaluation was to assess Australia’s assistance to refugees on the Thai-Myanmar border from 2010 to 2012. The report examines the appropriateness of the programs given Australia’s aid to Myanmar"
http://www.ausaid.gov.au/publications/Pages/thai-myanmar-border-assistance-refugees-evaluation.aspx

On this forum and others, "refugee" advocates & their allies have demonstrated a willingness --perhaps a need--to make things up as they go.And it not just Marilyn, it's practically every one of them from A to Z.

Quite amazing really!

Marylin Shepherd that is a disgusting lie! The Australian Navy has never fired on any refugee boat. You are quite disgusting! If you hate Australia and your fellow Australians so much, go and live somewhere else. As for silence, I think you have said more than enough and I will report you for this hateful lie!

Marilyn Shepherd - like usual you fail to answer questions and comments that do not conform to your biased viewpoint.

Here it is again.

Australian taxpayers do financially support some refugees in Indonesia that have been found to be genuine but are waiting there turn, which incidentally gets longer with the arrival of the Economic Invaders also coming from Indonesia.

A Quote from your link "While this would be more expensive, the notion that Australia is just too poor to contemplate such a system is simply ludicrous, especially when one looks at far poorer countries that accept vastly more refugees than Australia does.

An absolutely deceptive statement because those other poorer countries GIVE THEM NOTHING NOT 1 CENT, the refugees in the poor countries are supported by us and other countries.

Just how many Economic Invaders disguised as refugees do you think we should accept?

Don't forget on this part of the forum you only have 4 replies per 24 hours.

I would like to state categorically as someone who has been on the 'front line' of these so-called refugee issues, and as a former serving member of the RAN that I have, with my own eyes seen these people go about sinking their own boats as soon as the Navy arrives.

Marilyn you should be ashamed of your blinkered view of the truth.

These people care not for those putting their lives and others 'on the line' just to gain a grasp of sympathy from idiots and misinformed people like you.

Get a grip and talk to the people on the front-line, they may have an ability to give you a sense of what is really going on, then again, given censorship, I doubt it!

Geoff

The navy fired on the boat, it was the HNAS Adelaide in October 2001 and they did it dozens of time with 56 mm cannons in the middle of the sea in the middle of the night.

ARe you people 3 years old?

GEoff, there has been a full investigation into you silly claims, they are not true.

However, the border command people today are letting people drown.

Marilyn I apologise, you are are obviously unwell and a figure of pity but I will be reporting you for the comments you have made.

Well Marilyn,

as my brother-in-law was a Chief Petty Officer in charge of a certain department on the good ol' HMAS Adelaide from late 2000 until early 2002 I will check with him as to the veracity of 'your' claims, I am sure he will know the truth, and by the way, he is man of integrity.

I have been on plenty of operations whereby the vessel approached would fail to stop or heed calls to comply with international laws of the sea.

On the odd occasion that this would occur there are certain 'rules of engagement' that need to be complied with.

I can assure you no one and I repeat no one has fired on any refugee vessel in the last 20 years or so, you usually fire a warning shot, initially with a 7.62mm SLR round or the newer 5.56mm round at least 100 to 200 metres in front of the vessel to gain their attention and then ratchet up the threat until they stop. I can assure you the navy has never fired a 76mm round into any international vessel, unless during a time of conflict.

Australian warships do not fire on unarmed civilian vessels, unless you have a psycho Commanding Officer, and the last time I looked this would be an act of career limiting function.

Get your facts straight, the Navy do not operate 56mm 'cannons' and stop trying to pull the wool over real peoples eyes.

Have you ever been on a Patrol Boat in the middle of the night attempting to save peoples lives as they careen about the ocean trying to get to Australia, putting good ol' Australian sailors at risk the entire time, I thought not!

Geoff

It is getting very hard for the refugee advocates. On the one hand to acknowledge that their perspective and policy support has resulted in so many deaths, whilst on the other hand they cannot now support tightening of border security because it would be inhumane.

Tightening policy compromises their “compassion” whilst leaving it as it is, means more deaths.

Tough when you get it wrong and have to accept that you are free to express what you stand for, but in the end are “responsible” for what you express and “accountable” for the “consequences”.

Over a thousand “consequential” deaths seem excusable if it doesn’t get in the way of ideology I guess? You promote it, you wear it. But of course, you don’t have to pick up the body parts do you?

Good luck posters,
I engaged Marilyn Sheperd many times back when the Tampa and Siev x were in the news and found that she lies all the time. she and that Tony Kevin just make up things to suit themselves.

Seems nothing has changed. In my opinion she is best ignored.

Thank you Bruce. Hope you are not dis-spirited by the usual suspects.

I agree it was Howard who started this race to show who is better at getting rid of the boat people, these aliens who are just not one of us.

Reminds me of how the Chinese were treated in the 19th century.

The Chinese are all right now, of course. Both major parties are committed to the continued flow of money from China and both try to buy votes from Chinese Australians at marginal seats. How to treat China and all things Chinese has now become a matter of tacit bi-partisan policy.

We have to do the same for the boat people, if we are to become a mature nation, particularly if we really want a place at the table of the Asian century.

As for Fraser, let's not forget that he was the progenitor of the illegitimacy of an elected government mentality. Had Abbott not succumbed to that mentality since the beginning of Gillard's government we may not have descended to the depths of depravity to feed those of us addicted to inflicting cruelty to these unlovable boat people.

Bruce Haigh,

"We are a nation of volunteers; we give help where help is needed. We give generously to charitable causes including children in Third World countries. We encourage and applaud the underdog and we don’t kick a person when they are down."

That's what some of us were raised to believe......and now we find that it was just a mirage and (apparently) we're not really like that at all.

Obviously we pretended we were an altruistic bunch, but watch what happens when we're really pressed to come up with the goods - especially when the game changes to one on our doorstep.

I was born in the second half of last century - and I bought all that post-war guff - "boundless plains to share", etc.

What a crock I was sold.

Poirot,

You use the words “We are this and we are that”. Just because you are gullible doesn’t give you the right to speak for those who are not gullible.

Speak for yourself

spindoc,

You are right.

Some of us have given up trying to tie the current debate to any sense of decency...at least, the idea of decency which we were brought up to believe.

So, obviously I am speaking for "myself" who has, it appears, an extremely tenuous connection with most of the commenters on this forum.

Poirot
You Quoted Bruce Haigh, "We are a nation of volunteers; we give help where help is needed. We give generously to charitable causes including children in Third World countries. We encourage and applaud the underdog and we don’t kick a person when they are down."

That is a correct statement and you were not sold a crock.

There is a very good reason Aussies have little acceptance of the 'illegals'. We do not like to be conned and treated as fools. The illegals get here by bribery, fraud and lies. They pay far more than the normal commercial fare just so the can enter via the back fence. They gate crash our country and then lie to our officials with concocted stories, to take advantage of our generosity.

We have welcomed millions of immigrants from all over the world but we dislike cheats and con artists.

That is fair enough. We can hold our heads high on this issue.

Banjo,

You say...

"There is a very good reason Aussies have little acceptance of the 'illegals'. We do not like to be conned and treated as fools. The illegals get here by bribery, fraud and lies. They pay far more than the normal commercial fare just so the can enter via the back fence. They gate crash our country and then lie to our officials with concocted stories, to take advantage of our generosity."

That's your line.

That's the line of the pollies, employing this issue to get elected.

It may be a convenient line but it does not stack up against the evidence that nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing.

What it says about us is that we will embroider issues to conform with our idea of ourselves as altruistic and egalitarian....hence, the standard line that they're con artists, queue jumpers and economic migrants.

It lets us off the hook.

(.....and was ably demonstrated by Carr mouthing "economic migrants" at the top of his lungs as part of the softening up process to send men, women and children to a malarial camp)

@Poriot,

<<That's the line of the pollies, employing this issue to get elected>>

Yes, indeed, how dare they think that the will of the electorate should be accomodated!
Whoever heard of such an idea?

<<It may be a convenient line but it does not stack up against the evidence that nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing.>>

What evidence would that be Poriot?

Simple question: if they are for real, why do they destroy their papers?

(And, "they didnt have papers to begin with" is NOT a valid response.)

Poirot,
Another simple question. If they are genuine refugees why do they not fly here and enter the front door and then claim asylum? They would be far safer, save heaps of money and they would be free to go about their business while being assessed.

Tourist visas are readily available, we issue a couple of million each year

Poirot - What part of only 10 to 15% were checked properly, If they are not checked properly they can NOT truthfully be classified one way or the other.

Therefore the 90% figure is FALSE.

SPQR,
I have not validated this, but am told that some illegals do not destroy their travel docs. Before boarding the boat, they mail them back home for someone else to use.

Makes sense, why pay a forger for another lot? Only need a new photo.

SPQR, Philip S, Banjo,

Why don't you puerile men stop luxuriating in your ignorance and prejudice, and perhaps endeavour to educate yourself...

It's a big ask, I know. But consistently bleating garbage doesn't make it true.

Do yers reckon you can manage to read a document - and actually imbibe the information contained therein?...(I have my doubts)

Covering 2011 - 2012 (yes, numbers have increased since, but process still the same)

http://www.immi.gov.au/media/publications/statistics/asylum/_files/asylum-trends-aus-annual-2011-12.pdf

Poirot - Quote "Why don't you puerile men stop luxuriating in your ignorance and prejudice, and perhaps endeavour to educate yourself."

The same statement could be directed to you, if changed to the singular rather than plural.

If only 10 to 15% were checked properly how could you arrive at a REAL proportion IE 90%? It means 85 to 90% WERE NOT checked properly.

Poriot,

<< Why don't you puerile men stop luxuriating in your ignorance and prejudice...>>

Ridiculing your opponents does NOT answer their arguments!

And in case you were thinking you dodged the question, here it is again:
What evidence have you got that << nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing?>>

Sorry break the news to you that linking us to a site that talks of the numbers of “refugees” does not do it--it's not even a good attempt!

____________________________________________________

Banjo

<<SPQR, I have not validated this, but am told that some illegals do not destroy their travel docs. Before boarding the boat, they mail them back home for someone else to use>>

Sounds plausible, they are part of a very well organised scam. And they play us for all its worth,

But despite the best efforts the ABC & SBS & the Poirots' of this world to try and misinform and intimidate, people are beginning to waking up to it.

Cheers

Refugee policy? Methinks this is yet another of his policies which sound good in theory, but don't stand up to implementation.

Yesterday a boat arrived at Christmas island with another contingent, which demonstrates the conditions at sea were good enough to make it safely to shore.

At the same time we were told the flight for the first lot to be forwarded on was delayed due to bad weather.

Weather station figures for Christmas Island were light winds at 4.3 kilometres. PNG weather station had similar figures.

Go figure!!

Now we read there is a large spike in Vietnamese arrivals too. One has to wonder if there is a correlation between that and the Asian massage parlours which are springing up all over the place.
A lady friend went into one to ask for a massage for her back, but was told by the pretty Asian girl it was a massage parlour for men only.

One has to wonder which other opportunists are ready to jump on our gravy train.

Au contraire, SPQR,

"What evidence have you got that << nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing?>>"

The onus is on you to stump up with the "hard evidence" that these people are not refugees.

You're the one disputing official claims.

Poriot,

This is your statement of Wednesday, 31 July 2013 11:43:47 AM:
<<It may be a convenient line but it does not stack up against the evidence that nearly all these people are refugees and fleeing>>

You are telling us --are you not --that you've seen/have the evidence that they are for real?

So, that being the case, it is fair enough for us to ask you to share that evidence with us. I would have thought it BOTH fair --and easy-- since you have it all ready to hand --for you to put up!

I sincerely hope you're not one of those poker players who is holding a dud hand but bluffing about it,ay!

SPQR,

I take official statements on process as evidence.

You are disputing official statements on process.

If you've got some "hard evidence" to debunk official statements on process, then we're waiting with baited breath.

Poirot - Please tell us which one you are?

1) Gullible
or
2) A Hypocrite

I ask this because of your statement Quote "I take official statements on process as evidence."

Here you say you totally believe (as evidence) "official statements" which is gullible - Example please show me where the WMD's were in Iraq after all official statements used that to go to war there are hundreds of more examples that official statements were totally FALSE.

Now it could be hypocritical in you only take as evidence "official statements" on processes only all other official statements are false

Poriot,

<<SPQR,I take official statements on process as evidence>>

Ah, so, I guess you'd include Bob Carr's statements in that --or, do you pick and choose according to what best fits with what you want to believe?

SPQR - I think he really will regret that statement.

SPQR,

What's your point?

That pollies contort the truth to suit their agenda.

Really.....?!

I asked you for some hard evidence to counter the assumption that the immigration department processes it's asylum applications properly.

Where's your evidence?

Poriot,

<<what is your point?>>

See below:

Poriot: "I take official statements on process as evidence"

SPQR: *but, Poriot, Bob is head of the Dept (can't get much more offical than that!). And Bob is on record as saying asylum "seekers" have been defrauding and beating the processes/system in large numbers*

Poriot: *I choose not to believe what Bob Carr said -- he's lying*

SPQR: *So, Poriot, you don't believe ALL official statements --you choose to believe ONLY those which reinforce your prejudices!

Some of Poirot's poor boat people:

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2013/07/some-great-aussies-live-on-christmas-island-meet-a-dead-set-patriot-shaz-with-the-telephoto-lens.html

Odds on that they will be wearing comancheros' colours as soon as they hit the mainland.

Poirot's naivety and gullibility as expressed in government policy is simply throwing Australia under a bus.

Poirot,
You have yet to answer my question.

Clue: You will find the answer by comparing the percentage of asylum seekers approved of the legal arrivals, to the percentage of approvals for asylum of the illegal arrivals. Your link to the DIAC may help you.

SPQR,

Nice try....

I'm referring to official policy, procedure and protocols "within government departments". - not to election propaganda or promises....especially those by individual and/or high-profile pollies.

Where's your hard evidence that asylum seekers are not being processed properly?

......................

Banjo,

Don't quite know what you're getting at.

For non-IMA's (fly-ins)

The Primary grant rate was 25.3%

Of those initially refused and reviewed, the Final grant rate was 44%.

For IMA's

Primary decision - 71% were considered and decided - in the first instance. and found to be refugees.

Final grants - A total of 4766 Protection Visas were granted to irregular maritime arrivals in 2011-12, representing 68%
of such grants."

Poriot,

<<I'm referring to official policy, procedure and protocols "within government departments">>
And that is what Bob Carr was referring to,also.

He was telling *anyone who wanted to listen* that the mere fact the department's “official” figures showed over 90% had been rubber stamped “found to be genuine” had little to do with their bona fides – it was rather evidence of how low we have set the bar.

<< Where's your hard evidence that asylum seekers are not being processed properly?>>
Here is a very recent example of someone who was checked and cleared –but should not have been.

“A convicted Egyptian terrorist who arrived in Australia by boat as an asylum seeker was mistakenly cleared by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation to be released into the community even though he was on an Interpol red alert list.
http://www.mailtimes.com.au/story/1539749/terrorist-was-cleared-by-asio-as-asylum-seeker/?cs=8

But of course you(Poriot) will say that was only ONE –not so!

Here is evidence that it is not an exception –and from the ABC itself:

“There are claims that hundreds, if not thousands of people living in Australia may have committed crimes against humanity in different parts of the world, and their communities believe they know who they are.”
http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/backgroundbriefing/war-criminals-in-australia/3099724

And here are some reasons why it might happen:

<< the Immigration Department …often [gave] ASIO ''incomplete'' or ''poor-quality'' information about the people it wanted checked.>>
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/asio-lacks-staff-to-vet-refugees-20120625-20ykq.html

And more reasons why our processes are inadequate:

"The revelations came on Thursday when ASIO director-general David Irvine was questioned in a Senate estimates hearing, which also revealed that only 10 per cent to 15 per cent of asylum seekers arriving by boat receive a full ASIO security check before they are given protection visas."

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/call-for-inquiry-into-terrorist--asylum-seeker-20130530-2neu2.html

And here it is again:

"somewhere between 10 and 15 per cent of irregular arrivals are given a full security treatment"
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2013/s3771462.htm

But I am not naive enough to believe that any of this will move you --a coal truck full of proof wouldnt budge you.

SPQR - Thanks for the links I have saved the pages but did not have time to find the specific articles.

I am sure Poriot knows the 10 to 15% to be fact but is playing dumb.

SPQR,

So it appears that you are saying that unless ASIO processes "every" asylum seeker with full security treatment (not just those that immigration deem need "checking"), then asylum seekers are not being processed properly...?

Surely that comes down to a matter of "your opinion" regarding the standard of DIAC processes - and is not a general indication that those processes are sub-standard.

SPQR - With his answer now I am convinced he is playing dumb.

It does not matter if it is procedural or not If you only properly check 10 to 15% NO MATTER how you look at it that means 85 to 90 were not checked properly, would you like to be living next to them Mr Poirot.

You could statistically go further and check to what extent the refugees who have committed crimes were checked if not checked properly it says a lot for the system put in place by LABOR.

That would then be a system that does not fully protect Australian citizens.

Poriot,

<< you are saying that unless ASIO processes "every" asylum seeker with full security treatment (not just those that immigration deem need "checking">>
Nice twist, Poriot, but, how on Earth can anyone determine with any level accuracy who “needs” checking, when the illegals have conveniently “lost” their ID’s/papers and the dept. only has their word for who they are and where they come from?

You saw from the ABC report/link –or you would have done if you have read it with and open mind -- that there are 1000’s of people who entered OZ at a time when the our processes weren’t as stretched i.e. more able to check their backgrounds ,and they were cleared “found to be genuine” only for us to subsequently discover they had sallied backgrounds.

The processes you pretend to put great faith in ---and I emphasize *PRETEND* because I don't really think see them as adequate --are full of holes.

<<Surely that comes down to a matter of "your opinion" >>
Only my opinion? hardly so! by all accounts Bob Carr and the ALP after reviewing them-there immigration proceedures and processes have come to the same conclusion.

Which is why the majority of electors-- whether they vote ALP or NLP --will be voting to put an end to the scam and send the illegals offshore -- doesnt it just smart(ouch!) that the majority get to over-rule your Pollyannaish opinion!

SPQR,

What it comes down to is a definition of the term "checked properly".

You don't believe asylum seekers are checked properly because ASIO is not involved in a blanket coverage of investigation.

Fair enough - that's your opinion.

As for Carr....let's face it, as it stands, Labor believes that its chances of re-election will be best served by adopting a more ruthless line on asylum seekers....these days....

Of course Bob Carr would say what he said in the lead up to the announcement to fling asylum seekers full pelt onto Manus. If you're going to those lengths to keep refugees at arm's length then you need to first establish that you are being taken for ride and these people don't deserve your concern.

That's what Carr effected when Labor decided to take a leaf out of the LNP book on asylum seekers - for the purpose of making themselves more electable.

(You're right that for the majority of Australians, he was telling them what they want to hear. It doesn't mean he's accurate though)

Poirot's position is irrelevant because the majority, if not all, of the illegals are muslims.

Muslims cannot be checked as to their suitability for living in a democracy because islam is incompatible with Western democracy.

This whole discussion about vetting is surreal. Islamic societies are inherently oppressive so naturally there is a case for refugee status on the basis of the illegals' origin. But as is shown by every Western nation where the % of islam exceeds about 5% those illegals who come here to escape the Islamic oppression invariably commence establishing the type of Islamic society they left.

The position of people like Poirot is so removed from reality as to be insane; certainly HER [he is a she Philip S} position is demonstrably against the best interests of Australia continuing as a democratic society.

You don't have a dog do you Poirot? If so you had better watch out:

http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-1-193699-Malaysian-arrested-over-Eid-greeting-featuring-dogs