I'm sure that there is some sort of Human Right problem with the 1200+++ murdered by the various enablers such as Human Rights Lawyers who make a living from these deaths.

Irony on irony, refugees are still coming in but without bloated bodies floating in the ocean, staring sightlessly at the crabs eating their eyeballs, but of course the "Caring Class tm" are not making a nice little earner any more.

What the government is doing is putting a dampener on the refugee advocates and the people smugglers efforts to encourage more to come to Indonesia as a stepping stone to Aus. This is a good move and will encourage more to go back home.

Everyone has to realize that the refugee advocates and the smugglers are working together simply to make money, they care not for the asylum seekers. The asylum seekers them selves are opportunists who are prepared to gate crash our land for their own advantage and we bear the costs.

Keep going Mr Morrison, you are doing good and working for the interests of all Aussies.

Wow, another example of the great job Tony is doing.

He has put at rest the minds of 20 + million Ozzies, at the cost of alarming a few refugee advocates. Certainly sounds like grate maths to me.

Keep up the good work there Tony.

I'm ANTI Abbort in many areas, he's a dangerous joke, a puppet macabre, but insofar as the refugee situation goes I'm a supporter!
I started reading that article with hope, that it would discuss the treatment of OUR HR's, yet it was just another refugee whinge, very disappointing.
Morrison is a clear demonstration of everything that's wrong with our current government, yet he's certainly on the right track with the refugee industry, he just acts in the secretive, ham-fisted incompetent way we've come to expect from this disaster of a government.
The day I see G.Robertson and his ilk taking Islamic "refugees" into their own homes and supporting them I'll believe he's serious in his phony protestations, otherwise I'll continue to believe that he and his ilk are simply in it for the notoriety and their bank balances.
It's oh so easy to be idealistic and superior when YOU don't have to deal with the problems you help create.

G'DayBruce and yes, hear hear!
After all anyone genuinely seeking asylum only needs fly here, and at far less cost to them, than a one way boat ride to nowhere but the back of the queue; and claim asylum on arrival.
If their retained LEGITIMATE documents are in order and their claim able to be validated, they are accepted. We are legally obligated! No ifs buts or maybes!
So why all the fuss and hu har?
I mean, anybody would think a very lucrative employment were on the line?
Let me conclude by adding, I don't like Mr Morrison much either!
Cheers, Rhrosty.

Yeah right Rhosty, a group of genuine Afghanistan asylum seekers rocks up to the Afghan airport with all their correct papers, explaining how they want to leave their country because of the Taliban....and the airport officials say "...that's ok, off you go.", just as a few pigs fly overhead....

Suse,
Broken Borders, an article on immigration fraud and identity fraud among so called "refugees".
http://www.theage.com.au/national/brokenborders?rand=1407336867393
The Taliban and like minded groups don't "persecute" people who haven't done anything wrong but they treat criminals such as drug dealers, thieves and NATO spies with the customary tribal brutality which is the norm in that region, the reason some people are on the run from Afghanistan is because they're not good people in the first place.
What's more religous and tribal militias have always been a feature of Afghan society so it's not like people growing up there don't know how they're supposed to behave or what's expected of them.

Suse in your opinion what proportion of Australia's population should be from the "legacy" groups who made up the bulk of the pre 1970 population?
Could you also explain how our society benefits from accepting immigrants who cannot even fit into the society in which they are born?
If these people are the misfits and outcasts of the Third World who refuse to abide by the cultural norms of their homeland how can they offer anything to their host society which we couldn't get from those legacy groups?
Even if we take their excuse at face values what makes poor Afghans and Sri Lankans more deserving of asylum than poor Irish, Greeks, Italians or Serbs, to cite just a few examples of legacy groups?

Suse, the fact is that most of those "poor boat people" actually FLY into Indonesia, they have no difficulty accessing air-travel once they cross their own border.
All they need do in every other nation they pass through is inform the "gate-keepers" that they're on their way to Australia and away they go unimpeded, those nations don't want them any more than WE do.
The Tamils that put to sea in old boats are obviously a different case and there I tend towards a more merciful approach, but given that they could just as easily sail to the Tamil areas of India without the greater risks involved in heading South to Oz they must surely be seen as "economic" refugees, they are plainly seeking the more lucrative opportunities here than actual safety.
They are at liberty to seek refugee status in India and apply to come to Oz, joining the "queue" and awaiting assessment and fair consideration, yet they prefer to "force" their way in instead, an act that, to me, should disqualify them immediately.

G'Day Bruce, do you really blame refugees or asylum seekers from preferring to take their chances in Australia rather than the other poor countries surrounding the ones they have just fled from?
I don't....

Are you really that naïve Suse to believe that you couldn't buy your way out of Afghanistan for much less than the cost of a boat ride out of Indonesia?

Suze, of course I don't blame them, but it does rather make a mockery of their and their supporters claims for refugee status based on their fear for their lives and safety, doesn't it?
As I said, they have the same opportunity by fleeing to safety without all the dangers of a massive sea voyage by going to nearby India and applying to Australia there, by coming here direct and without said refugee status granted they are demonstrating their priorities clearly, money first and foremost, which suggests to me they're more greedy than frightened.

Wow Hasbeen, you must be well travelled if you have been to Afghanistan and seen all this happening at airports, or, like me, are you just judging all your 'knowledge' on what you read and hear in the media or from Afghan people here in Australia?

G'Day Bruce, if I was a woman living in danger in Afghanistan, I would do whatever it takes to get my family to the best place possible.
If I thought that might happen faster by taking a boat, I would do it.

As it happens, I am happy there have apparently not been any more asylum seekers dying at sea trying to get here,
although I doubt Morrison would let us know if they had, do you?
I agree we can't afford to take more than our fair share of worldwide refugees.

I am of the opinion that if they are genuine refugees or asylum seekers who pass all the stringent criteria to be allowed to settle legally in Australia, then it doesn't matter where they come from, nor what God they follow.

It has come to my attention that if the religious folk of Australia are serious, and perhaps the publication by the Council of Churches regarding the treatment of children in detention in particular indicates some degree of Spirit, that one strong thing that they could do would be to make it a "religious duty" not to vote at this stage.

(and of course some religious groups already do this)

They could of course be very vocal about their reasons for this.

In so doing they would provide a solid legal defence for individuals refusing to legitimise relevant politicians with their vote, and I believe that would indeed have some resonance within the Australian community for the better.

Of course, conceivably, if the situation were to be rectified, then they could of course absolve their flocks of this duty in the future.

You must understand that once the state thinks little of treating people in the manner in which it does then it really ought come as no surprise that you have a government presently that wants to make some highly repugnant new laws like no $ for 6 months for some whilst currently paying themselves obscene amounts, which in my view is entirely undeserved in the real world light of "a fair days pay for a fair days work."

If you let mainstream politicians get a taste that it is acceptable to abuse people, then don't be surprised when their abusive practices have any of you in its sites.

If a teacher in a school treated a child under their care in the manner that the commonwealth treats asylum seeker children then it would no doubt be considered criminal in my opinion.

Wake up to yourselves Australia.

Grow up dreamer.

If you were genuinely in fear for your life, & someone gave you a safe free haven, where your every need was catered for, in spades, in a beautiful tropical location, you would be jumping for joy. All your prayers & hopes would have been answered.

If you then complained & wanted to move to another destination it would be totally proven your reason for traveling was not safety as claimed, but something entirely different.

That is you were lying, & as a liar & thus confidence trickster, should be excluded from ever entering Australia.

Suze, your obfuscating IMO.
Those "poor Afghan Women" don't come all the way in boats, they generally travel by air across several other countries, mostly Muslim, then hop into boats for the final leg here, which is commonly a journey of only hours. Surely even you cannot claim that refugee status is a supermarket where they can pick and choose where they wish to insist on living, and that their thus chosen nation MUST accept their economic choice?
To my mind if they're escaping such horrors that they're forced to flee for their lives then once they've crossed an International border into a nation where their particular threat can't reach them then they are SAFE, for all intents and purposes, and after that if they wish to move on to another place they are no longer entitled to refugee status, they are by definition immigration applicants and should apply and fulfill any preconditions accordingly.
If not, why not, what makes them special?
My comments about the boats was mainly focused on Tamils, as I clearly stated, and much the same as above applies there too.

Gotta love the Kiwi refugee tactic, they are much more "Humanitarian" than Oz, easier entry, faster citizenship, but when you look at their intake across the last decade or so and their actual immigrant population there's a huge discrepancy, unless they're secretly executing masses of them, lol.
Most of their refugees etc get citizenship and promptly move over here!
AS "kiwis" they don't show up in our refugee stats at all, and barely make a ripple in demographic data.

I am not sorry to say that your simplistic circular reasoning does not cut the mustard *HasBeen*

The reality, is the collective treatment of these children by the RockSpiders goes do summon a Dementor, for want of a better way to explain it, and the evidence is that more and more children have now taken to banging there heads against the wall, a common symptom as was explained by one expert witness (the chief psychiatrist) at the not so long ago inquiry.

Worse still, the same expert witness claimed (and in my words) that the largely filthy white child abusing trash in the immigration department actually requested that this information be removed from the report.

If the guvment spent as much time on the economy as it does on trying to hide things, then we would surely have growth in excess of that presently experienced.

It would be nice if this fantasy utopia that you imagine were real, but unfortunately it is nothing other than significantly disconnected from reality.

Of course, there is another important dimension to this, and a site for some of the worst politics of division and I recall comments made by an acquaintance whom I affectionately refer to as "Guvna Pom."

"No, No," he said. "It was not just the english, but the aristocracies as a whole tended to treat their own people very, very, poorly, all the way around."

I would add to this an overlapping memory of the then Senator Vanstone who responded to questions regarding the mental health treatment of detainess by saying something to the effect of:

"Well they don't get any more or any less treatment than any other detainee."

Now look, whether it be "Deaths in Custody" or anything else of quality in a vast base of well considered reports, inquiries etc, the guvment well knows the effect of this type of treatment on people, let alone children, which does in turn go to " ... the knowing infliction of mental harm ..."

thus it begs the question, what exactly are they trying to achieve in relation to these detainees?

If they know as they have known for a long time now that their treatment of these people goes to engender adverse medical outcomes, does it not follow that the belligerent continuation of same goes to the guvment's want to destroy these people in whole or in part?

Do not think lightly of incarceration and mental health and there is more to the Genocide Convention Act than wholesale slaughter alone.

And of course, why would you want to go anywhere near any of that?

A Sudanese refugee raped a 16-year-old girl four times then forced the girl's friend to rape her three times, a court was told on Monday.

The court also heard that Hakeem Hakeem bashed a 63-year-old woman in her home the day after raping the teenager.

Hakeem went on a sex-crime spree just a month after arriving in Australia and then told a church worker he thought he was an evil person for what he had done, the Victorian Supreme Court in Melbourne court was told.

Hakeem, 21, formerly of Dandenong, arrived in Australia with his family on February 9 last year.

On March 10, Hakeem and another man raped a 16-year-old girl at a scout hall in Dandenong, south-east of Melbourne.

The following day, Hakeem raped and bashed a 63-year-old woman in her Dandenong home, leaving her with fractured eye sockets, a fractured nose and wounds to her back and arm.

Prosecutor Michele Williams said Hakeem choked the elderly woman and slashed her throat twice.

"She thought she was going to die," Ms Williams said.

"After he had slashed her throat with the knife she begged to be taken to hospital and gave the prisoner $100."

In Dandenong the next day, Hakeem raped a 16-year-old girl four times and forced the victim's 16-year-old friend to rape her three times.

He threatened both teenagers with a razor blade and scissors, and cut their hair so he could take a sample with him.

Last month, a jury found Hakeem guilty of one count of each of rape and false imprisonment in relation to the March 10 attack.

Hakeem was sentenced to 24 years incarceration with a 17 year non parole period.

Total cost to Australia? Two raped girls, one elderly woman bashed in her own home, his wife and kids on the dole till God knows when, maximum security costs of $80,000 dollars per annum per prisoner for the next 17-24 years. We got a real bargain with Hakeem, didn't we? But Susieonline and Jay Cannon care more about people like Hakeem than the safety and welfare of their own people.;

AN IRANIAN "refugee" has been refused bail after being charged with the violent rape of a teenage girl on the Anzac Bridge on Thursday. Amir Mohebbifar was arrested shortly after the 19-year-old girl was sexually assaulted just after 2.30am.Paramedics treated her at the scene and detectives from Leichhardt police immediately set up a crime scene to screen for forensic traces of her attacker.Mohebbifar was arrested within hours and held at Sydney City police station.

AN Afghan refugee who raped two women within a week in 2008 has won a reduced sentence because of his traumatic upbringing. Esmatullah Sharifi, 32, was originally sentenced to 14 years jail in April 2012, with a minimum of 11 years, for the rape of two women in late December 2008. The first victim was a woman he offered a lift to outside a night club in Frankston.
The second was a woman from whom he asked directions on Christmas day.
But the Court of Appeal today cut the minimum sentence to eight years and six months after accepting he suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder after a brutal upbringing in Afghanistan.

Maybe when Judy Cannon and Susieoncrack get raped by a "refugee" they might begin to figure out that these people are dangerous. Sweden and Denmark are in the throes of a rape epidemic caused almost entirely by people they have foolishly allowed to settle in their countries for "humanitarian" reasons.

LEGON, you are getting hysterical.

We don't need to import refugee men to rape or kill the women here in Australia, as there are plenty born, bred and raised here who are already doing that, and have been for years.

Anyone who does rape and kill others will be jailed etc, wherever they were born.
I am quite happy to see all of them deported....whether they were born here or not.
Maybe all those who aren't Aboriginal could be returned to the country of ancestral origin for those major crimes?

To Susieoncrack.

The crime of rape in Australia was so rare that crime records kept in the parliamentary yearbook showed a total of 9 convictions of rape and attempted rape in 1923 (source, Rising Crime in Australia, Lucy Sullivan, page 14) Between 1963 and 1993, rape rose by a factor of 14, or 1400%, which pretty well conforms to rising levels of third world immigration into Australia. . In the year 2000, 70 Australian girls were gang raped in Sydney by Muslim race hate rape packs from Pakistan and Lebanon.

Nnaturally, the Muslim head honcho, Sheik Al Hilaly defended the rapists by declaring the raped Australian girls to be "cat meat" who deserved it.

The reason why he said that, is because Islam is a male dominated religion dedicated to keeping females (like yourself) under the thumb of Muslim males forever, by using violence. Under Islam, a man is considered to have "uncontrollable lusts" that only a woman can control by dressing with extreme modesty. Any woman who gets raped in a Muslim state has committed a crime and is punished (sometimes by death) because under Islam, it is all her own fault. A Muslim woman must have four male Muslim men as witnesses who watched the entire rape from start to finish as witnesses to justify any plea of innocence on her part. Naturally, that is impossible to do.

Rape is therefore a weapon that Muslim men use to keep women under control. Muslim men also believe that men have a right to chastise women who do not act in accordance with Islam, and rape is a suitable punishment for them if they do. Islam has a religious belief condoning rape.

What occurred in Sydney, and has just occurred in Britain, is common wherever large numbers of Muslim men have been allowed to emigrate into advanced societies. Just click on Google and see what is occurring in France, Denmark, Holland, Norway and Sweden, where very high incidences of rape by Muslim men on local women is the norm. Don't believe me, click on Google and see for yourself.