Why can't we have a rational debate on the issue of
asylum-seekers. Why does it have to be a choice of -
"you're either with us or against us!"
Why do we have to view people who disagree with us
as being "bad," and thereby wanting "open borders."

The following link is worth a read:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/time-to-change-our-perception-of-asylum-seekers-20140724-zvmnm.html

And -

Julian Burnside, QC offers some answers to the problem:

http://www.thebigsmoke.com.au/2014/04/07/reality-boat-people-solution-asylum-seeker-problem/

I am proud that we no longer kill ongoing hundreds of people on the high seas to assuage the vanity of the those who want to "Vogue" compassion and care not for the consequences.

It is beyond my limited comprehension how the "compassioniartas" can so blithely kill so many, whether it is 4 roasted to the Green god in roofs, damaged and killed kiddies from whooping cough (etc), the high seas or Islamist denialism.

Rhian - "An end to offshore detention and processing" is effectively an open borders policy as far as the people smuggles are concerned. Their job is to get the people to Australia - the primary deterrent to hiring their service is the passengers will be detained offshore and highly unlikely to ever gain access into Australia.

_____________________________________________________

FOXY, I agree with this statement from your first article "it is a question of finding a way of managing the issue in our region that treats asylum seekers in a fair and dignified manner, while recognising that we can only protect a tiny proportion of the millions displaced across the world." 'Tiny' being the optimal word.

The second article is clearly from a perspective of advocating for the boat people (because they don't have the same advantage of other asylum seekers who arrive by plane). The author states, in regard to those who opt to arrive by boat - "Typically, these people travel to Malaysia or Indonesia on forged papers. They do not pass through countries that have signed the UNHCR Refugee Convention,... "

Forged papers? Why should Australia take these people?

Sorry FOXY, you are never going to convince me that taking in thousands of unskilled, uneducated, most Muslim, potential life long welfare recipients who are also inclined to not assimilate into our culture, is in Australia's best interest.

Hi Foxy,

I don't think anybody has said that those who effectively want open borders are necessarily bad - very short-sighted perhaps, political opportunists perhaps, not too bright perhaps. But not all bad.

Ask yourself: is it suggested that whoever makes it to Australia should be absorbed quickly into the welfare system and the community, and looked after until they can get on their feet ? Whoever makes it here ?

In other words, whoever makes it to Australia by leaky boat, should be able to stay ? Then why make them go through the dangerous process of paying smugglers and taking their chances on a leaky boat - why not just let them fly from Jakarta or wherever ?

And if those people, why not as many as wish to, from anywhere, as long as they can afford the air-fare ?

OR should we give some priority to the most destitute - you know, the people who will never be able to afford even an air-fare ? There are many millions of such refugees, genuine refugees.

Like it or not, either way, we are being selective: either we have some sense of priority and take the most destitute and those who have waited longest - OR we only come to life when there are people in our line of sight ?

Agonising choices - no easy ways. Increase the quota of genuinely destitute and desperate people, ESPECIALLY if they will never be able to afford an air-fare.

Regards,

Joe

Loudmouth,

I get what you are saying, but being "destitute" does not qualify anyone for refugee status. In fact, war in ones' s country is not a reason to be considered a refugee. The Convention was originally designed for displaced Europeans after WW11.

The document signed by the leftist idiot, Bert Evatt, has been turned and twisted to suit the awful United Nations. Sadly, our awful politicians went along with it. No t a single one of the people who have arrived by boat, forcing themselves on us and living in relative luxury on
welfare provided by Austalians' taxes would qualify under the Refugee Convention that was actually signed by an Australian politician all those years ago.As I have said, it is a con arranged by the United Nations, and agreed to by gutless politicians more interested in how they are seen globally than they are in Australia and Australians

Dear McCackie,

<<I am proud that we no longer kill ongoing hundreds of people on the high seas>>

Are you confessing for murder?

I never killed anybody, anywhere, so please do not include me in this "we".
Thank you.

(and as for the people in question, to the best of my knowledge they were not murdered at all, but died by the elements of nature after recklessly setting sail on the high seas in unseaworthy boats)