The Forum > Article Comments > Forging friendships in adversity > Comments
Forging friendships in adversity : Comments
By Shira Sebban, published 31/8/2016In other words, unlike Australian citizens, an asylum seeker can be detained for anything from a traffic infringement to spitting in public or hosting a noisy party.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
The writer is entitled to be sentimental if she choses, even though she knows full well that anyone in detention has come here illegally and will never be allowed to settle in Australia. And, she should know that there is no reason for anyone from Sri Lanka, including Tamils, to be seeking "asylum"; they are sent back to Sri Lanka, and welcomed home by their own government. All this has been made clear to them, and to this writer. We also note that the "chef" ignored the instruction to stop feeding detainees, and continued to "smuggle" food in with the help of others prepared to flaunt the rules of the country they are trying to use, when they have no rights or entitlements to be here.
Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 31 August 2016 9:44:38 AM
| |
Here I find myself completely agreeing with ttbn!
And can only add, WE WILL DECIDE WHO COMES TO THIS COUNTRY AND THE MANNER OF THEIR ARRIVAL! Alan B. Posted by Alan B., Wednesday, 31 August 2016 11:35:18 AM
| |
Lucky the author is mainly talking about Tamils - a (non-Muslim) minority in detention.
Tamils are Hindus (ie. not Muslim). Tamils integrate more easily into Australian culture and society. For example Hindu Tamil males are not affronted by the whole idea of a women walking on the street unescorted by a male relative. Here's a Tamil couple. Note the lack of headscarf or full covering for the woman http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/thumb/msid-25694309,width-600,resizemode-4/Ananya.jpg . Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 31 August 2016 1:37:18 PM
| |
Plantagenet,
Yes, Tamils are Hindus, so you would think that they would be happy in India (Tamil Nadu) where they came from. But they left there, with their noses out of joint, for some long-forgotten reason, and they caused trouble in Sri Lanka, until they decide on a war, which they lost. They were not happy in a majority Hindu country; they went to a Sri Lanka, a majority Bhuddist country, then they wanted a separate Tamil region there (which they already had in Tamil Nadu), despite there only being a 12.6% of Hindus in Sri Lanka, slightly higher than the 7% of Muslims. Tamils have always been a source of friction, even in India where they share the majority religion. They are a pain in the posterior, just one more problem we do not need in Australia. And, if Dutton is to be believed, one we will never suffer. Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 31 August 2016 2:16:55 PM
| |
"These Tamils from Tamil Nadu were brought to Ceylon as indentured labourers. ‘Indenture’ is a sealed agreement binding servant to master. The poverty-stricken, ignorant and illiterate Tamils of South India were subjected to the terms of indenture and brought to Ceylon to work on plantations.
These unfortunate Tamils were condemned to virtual slavery under the British, and, after independence, to the Sinhalese [Buddhist Majority] masters." http://www.sangam.org/articles/view2/?uid=653 Revolt > War > still a despised minority in a Sinhalese majority country. SRI LANKA 2015/2016 https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/asia-and-the-pacific/sri-lanka/report-sri-lanka/ "A new government in January brought constitutional reforms and promises of improved human rights protection. [BUT] Many human rights challenges remained, including persistent use of arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and other ill-treatment, enforced disappearances and deaths in custody, and a long-standing climate of impunity for these and other violations." Posted by plantagenet, Wednesday, 31 August 2016 5:26:27 PM
|
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All