The system needs to be completely overhauled and getting rid of detention centres is a beginning to this.

BOAZ_David - In answer to why people protest outside detention centres.

Yes, I have written to the Prime Minister, Immigration Ministers (both Ruddock and Vanstone), Opposition Immigration Ministers (Gillard, Roxon and Ferguson) and many others. Actually they are NOT listening which is why I have protested outside detention centres, DIMIA offices and in the street as well as writing to newspapers, leafletting and organising events re: refugee rights.

The Baxter 2005 protest shows the frustration of those who have and are continually trying to change the system and aren't listened to by the federal government. (John Howard doesn't even listen to his own backbenchers on this issue!).

BOZZIE - the law
Most lawyers work for nothing in the courts because they can't stand what Australia is trying to do to asylum seekers by the use of the 'deterrant' detention centres. So much for 'blood-suckers'.

Davo - political!
Yes, it is political because John Howard has used asylum seekers as pawns for his scaremongering and re-election.

Col Rouge - abc
a. The journey to asylum can involve travelling through more than one country.
b. Detention drives people mad as well as being enormously expensive and inhumane.

c. Just because other countries have detention of asylum seekers doesn't make it right or just.

I agree completely with Miranda on this, and will add one more point:

All of us owe the protestors for keeping the plight of the immorally detained refugees in the news. Otherwise, who would know of the gross injustices perpetrated, against these longsuffering people, by our Federal government for cynical political advantage?

The protestors are not 'morons', as offensively described by someone above (who has apparently not bothered to read much about the real situations from which most of the detainees have fled).

They are more correctly described as our embodied social conscience.

Australia and all the developed countries put together cannot simply take people in and solve the problems of 6.4 billion going on 9 billion people on a planet that can sustainably support perhaps 2 billion in modest comfort. We are not at the point of having to knock back genuine refugees, but we will be at that point if we abandon detention and for every real refugee get 8 or 9 illegals who intend to disappear into the community as has been happening in Britain. (Illegal is a fair description of an economic migrant who fraudulently poses as a refugee.) Because these people often have no or no legitimate travel documents it can be very difficult to deport them. To Miranda, Rossco, et al. where is your evidence that it couldn't happen here or can be easily prevented?

Rossco's paean to immigration deserves an answer. All nations are "nations of immigrants" if you go back far enough. There are cultural advantages to having some immigration. Science and the arts are international enterprises. Yet no large scale study has shown any significant economic benefit to the host population as a whole as a result of mass migration. Lower income people are badly hurt as they are squeezed between depressed wages and conditions, sky high housing costs, overstretched infrastructure and public services and shrinking open space. See "The New Americans", the 1997 report of the US National Academy of Sciences, the work of Harvard economist Prof. George Borjas (www.borjas.com), himself a refugee, and the studies cited at the Centre for Immigration Studies (www.cis.org). Some powerful groups, such as the property developers, do benefit at the expense of the rest of the community. The politicians are dancing to these people's tune and imposing mass migration on us because they care more about large donations for the next election campaign than about what sort of quality of life Australia will be able to offer in 50 years' time.

Miranda...
simple questions:

1/ "how many people would you accept into Australia who claimed Assylum" ? please put a figure on it.
2/ Do you see any political advantage for any particular group which may be perceived as 'pro-asslylum seeker' if lots are let in ?
3/ Is it posssible that the 'immoral' conditions of rather well built 'Immigration welfare Centres' (which u call 'detention' centres are partly a media beat up where the focus brought about by groups such as yours, encourage the 'guests' to perform outrageous attention seeking behavior. (specially some hard core fraudulent ones)
4/ When you protest, do you have the NAME of any political organization displayed on your posters ? such as 'Resistance' or.. 'Socialist Alliance' ?

5/ If yes, can you see why people could be a tad cynical about your real motivation ?

Garra “To claim that the majority of people who risk everything to get here by boat are 'economic' refugees is just rubbish - if they had the money, they would just fly here on tourist visas and overstay, like most of our 'illegal' immigrants.”

And from what I heard of the rates Indonesian pirates and smugglers charged, getting here by boat is not a cheap exercise either – the difference – airports have migration checks – deserted beaches do not.

Don’t bother with fanciful apologetics – they could get here cheaper by air but would be unable to evade the scrutiny of migration officers at airports – hence economic refugees attempting illegal entry and avoidance of migration, customs and health checks.

Which reminds me tuberculosis is a communicable and notifiable disease – and migrants are checked for it before they are allowed to travel here. How many epidemics of that or cholera or ebola or god knows what other maladies and diseases are you prepared to expose your family to contact with from an unscreened illegal migrant? I suggest you try thinking about what you are really supporting.

As for illegal overstays – when caught, they are deported likewise.

Miranda – abc?
Illegal immigrants put themselves in “harms way” – by attempting to evade immigration processes – we are not responsible for their stupidity or ultimately any supposed "madness" (such "instability" would probably be enough to disqualify them from migration anyway)– I suggest read the above to garra and learn before you post sentimentalist apologies for those who elect to pursue a mode of entry to Australia which is immoral and indefensible.

Their is nothing unjust, illegal or inhumane in detaining those who would choose to deliberately evade our legally constituted migration and custom authorities.

Col, we dont agree on all things but we SURE agree on this issue.
As for Garra and Miranda, depending on whether they subscribe to the Socialist Left view, or are members of any such party, they may well be of the ultimate view that "International Borders are barriers to workers" and hence "They should not exist". This is as fundamental to the 'International Socialist' dogma as the 10 commandments are to we 'godbotherers'.

Why anyone would waste their precious lives on something that has been repeatedly proven to be flawed is beyond me. It flawed because human nature is flawed, and eventually also, they 'tweak' to the fact that life is of limited duration, and now they have 'ALL THIS POWER' to play with, the romantic idealism is discarded as 'useful for a while' and the ensuant 'dictatorship of the empowered few on the politbeuro' takes hold and the poor old 'proletariat' is left in the food que's etc.

But thats where you and I usually part company :) I say "no system will be good, unless renewed people are managing it" and I'll also say that renewed people have moments of straying and need to have continual prophetic encouragement to walk the walk as well as talk the talk.

Someone might say "what does this have to do with the topic" ? PLENTY, I see the topic as evidence of a political struggle by those left of Marx who will use 'any means' to justify the end.

An 'off topic' note though, sorry, about the funeral of the Pope. Did anyone notice how predominant 'Maryology' was in all the proceedings ?
Can anyone show me ONE example of Apostolic preaching of the gospel which includes anything about Mary ? (possibly that Jesus was 'born of a woman' is about as far as they go) The Cross on the Coffin was great, the 'M' there was strange. Some of the officials spoke of him being 'Welcomed by the mother of God'....I had teary eyes about the multitudes and the wonderful man, but this emphasis (Maryology) I find most disturbing.