Xena, the other forum 'Muslim Village' ? I was censored there, but I don't quite see what u mean by Christian charity ? Speak the truth in love is also a Christian virtue, but I admit, I am human and there are times when things get to me like anyone, and I find myself wanting to 'win an argument'. I regret such excursions.

Xena,

-'as many as we can environmetally support' good :) now we can begin to discuss some reasoning and logic. Ok.. question. When the government decides we are 'full' but people KEEP COMING because while Australia is full, its less overfull than Lahore or Mumbai, or wherever, so people continue to come, WHAT do u do with them then ? Ultimately, you would be cornered into having to have a deterrant policy, what would that be ? shoot them before they set foot here ? or, just let em come, and re-shape our country as they see fit ? Please answer this little bit, its important for an on-going discussion.

I strongly suggest, that if large numbers of people of Macedonian backround started to arrive, the Greeks would be making representations to the Immig dept quick smart :) People are still people.

Col, thanx for the support, I actually would support a 'picky and choosy' immig policy, mainly to keep 'balance' as a goal. No one ethnic group being over represented. I often reflect on a couple of typical indicents. The Greeks and Macedonians who hate each others guts and try to rip said 'guts' out of the other at soccer matches, and the Serbs, Croats and Muslims of the Bosnia/Yugoslavia events. The Greek/Macededonian issue goes back a couple of 1000 yrs, they clearly dont forget. When we allow immigrants, here, we are also by default also allowing their 'issues' with them, so if we have 2 communities pre-disposed to hate and violence against each other, I would include this in the assessment of suitability for residence and citizenship of Australia.

But I'm totally with you on the 'we determine, not outsiders' -on who comes here.

Shoshana “I’m a bit perplexed as to why you insist that asylum seekers are “flouting our laws”.

Arriving without a visa and making an asylum claim is a contingency covered in the Migration Act, and starts a process to assess the claim.”

I would suggest avoiding normal points of entry, choosing instead to seek out a deserted beaches to land on without the formalities of customs/migration officers displays “clear intent to flout migration procedures”.

“Asylum seekers who arrive without valid visas (usually by boat) are detained while their claims are assessed. Most of this group (like 90% most) are found to be refugees.”

Those who are found to be “genuine refugees” are not detained but released on being issued a visa – so what is your point - are you attempting to defend those who clearly are not and suggesting we reward their bad faith behaviour?

Comments from HREOC (an office which should be disbanded) – as a father of children I have always accepted and fulfilled my responsibility as a parent. The parents of children in detention are the ones who are fundamentally responsible for their actions and parenting likewise. They actively and freely pursued the course of action which resulted in their detention.

As BOAZ_David correctly said – if you want to focus of Muslim migrants why do they make the extra journey to Australia when directly due North of us is the largest Muslim nation in the world where refugees from the middle east will be free of their persecutors and embraced by a like-minded religious majority? - Economic advantage is why – and that makes them economic refugees – not real asylum seekers.

David_BOAZ – on the matter of Serb v Croat interracial conflict etc – coming from UK and having been bombed by IRA - to be honest I have always been amazed there is not more Anglo-Irish resentments – thank God in Australia with most people the baggage of the old-country is left in those lands and the tolerance of multi-culturalism does, largely, prevail.

Col, yes, it is quite unusual that those of Irish/Brit/Scot ancestry do not seem to have brought those conflicts here, I'm not sure why, perhaps one reason is that we dont have any system likely to favor one side or the other. John Howard is Anglican by background, Costello Baptist, and Abbot Catholic, seems like a good mix :) at least it shows that at the top echelons of power, denominational tradition is not an issue.

When in Borneo, working with a non denominational mission we were happily giving formal training to the Anglican bloke (a Canon) and the fellowship between protestant groups was 'seamless' as the saying goes.

I don't see any such harmony between Greek and Maceodonian, Serb and Croat, Lebanese/Palentinian and Israeli. Or Muslims in general with Jews.

CHILDREN IN DETENTION.

Actually this is interesting. These families have survived persecution,(allegedly) and difficult traumatic journeys, being ripped off by greedy underhanded parasites who put them in leaky boats, and suddenly when they are fed 3 meals a day, have comfort and security and safety .. "OH.. its too much, we have to kill ourselves"

I mean.... *THINK*...... something is wrong with that, suddenly they go from 'robust travellers facing hostile forces on every side' to "cringing fearful suspicious and suicidal victims". Children should be with families always, with parents.

No doubt someone will point out my 'lack of Christian compassion' but I think its plain common sense to assess facts and situations on merit. Then there will be 'What would Jesus do' ... ah.. well, I recall he went to Temple and drove out those who were using it as an oppotunity to 'cash in'. It seems that when people advocate responsible political stewardship of a country they are immediately beaten to debate death with 'what would Jesus do' .. its almost the same as using the 'hitler- death of discussion ploy.
Jesus is not a hammer and I'm not a nail. I'm quite willing to engage at length on the Biblical Jesus, but please dont use His name just for scoring points over issues like this.

BOAZ_David - 3 meals a day

The people who come here seeking asylum are fleeing from political persecution not economic problems. Getting three meals a day is not their difficulty. In fact the food in detention is not a reason to come to Australia at all - it is disgusting and asylum seekers in detention would rather cook their own but aren't permitted to do so.

There is a big difference between a refugee who needs economic survival and a refugee who is fleeing political persecution. Personally I think both have valid needs but this discussion is about those who are in detention seeking asylum ie. with political problems.

The Netherlands is having second thoughts about letting in so many Muslim asylum seekers ever since Theo Van Gogh was stabbed in the street for saying things the Muslims did'nt like. France is having huge social problems with the ever increasing North African muslim population. Because they don't assimilate. Muslims in China are even demanding their own Islamic state (and the U.S as well). That is probably why muslim asylum seekers is such a contentious issue, Howard. Quite frankly, white people generally don't represent such a threat!

As for Vietnamese refugees, some are good, some are bad. Bad, you know the drug dealing lot you see in Springvale. Since some are good and some bad, detention centres are a good resource to check character. How do you know they are'nt fleeing punishment for a crime they have committed? Say a murderer fleeing revenge attacks by his victims family.

Col,“Those who are found to be “genuine refugees” are not detained but released on being issued a visa – so what is your point - are you attempting to defend those who clearly are not and suggesting we reward their bad faith behaviour?”

My point is (and its one that’s not generally well known)

Some asylum seekers are detained, some are not.

The ones who are detained, often for years, are the ones most likely to be assessed as refugees and granted visas. The ones who are not detained are the most likely to fail in their refugee claims.

1. Those who arrive with a visa (business or student or tourist) – they usually come by plane. They live in the community while their refugee claims are being assessed. The majority of this group have their claims rejected and leave the country.

2. Those who arrive without a visa - they usually come by boat.
They are held in detention centres whilst their claims are assessed.
90% or more of this group are found to be refugees and given visas. Some are detained for 3, 4 and 5 years while their claims are assessed, and then found to be refugees.

It’s a stupid, unnecessary, expensive system that does not deter people fleeing terror.

It was in place for years and the numbers went up.

Asylum seeker numbers world wide have gone down significantly in the last couple of years because of changed circumstances in Afghanistan and Iraq. The push factors in countries of origin play a greater role than local Australian policy even though pollies like to take the credit. Doesn’t take much research to understand what really makes a difference.