Asylum seekers who arrive in Australia are locked up in jail for years without end for no legal reason. If you want to support this ongoing process it is on your conscience.

I will continue to work for an end to detention of asylum seekers until it is acheived, hopefully in my lifetime.

Boaz_DAVID; What the late pope's beliefs are/were is none of your business at all. As a matter of fact they could be seen as anti-scriptual. "Who are you to judge another's servant" or words to that effect. Do you BD have all knowlege, all the right dogma? - I'll answer for you - NO! According to the Scriptures the work of God is "To believe on Me and He who sent Me"and the late Pope appeared to do just that. It seems that God does not put emphasis on dogma like we mortal twits do, He looks on our heart. Could this Mary-man have more love in his little finger than you have in your entire body - I wonder. Anyhow this is not a religious forum so maybe I also have crossed the line. regards, numbat. PS No I am not catholic, not perfect, just forgiven.

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

Asylum seekers do not choose to deliberately evade...to the contrary, they ask for assistance, and Australian law has provision to provide asylum for those fleeing persecution. To ask for asylum whilst on Australian land is lawful, it's covered under the Migration Act.

Maybe there is nothing unjust, illegal or inhumane in detaining people for a short period in suitable accommodation as happens in other countries. But indefinite detention for asylum seekers is uniquely Australian and will always be unjust and inhumane.

Asylum seekers are never charged with an offence. Although legal under Australian constitution to lock people up for their entire lives when they are innocent of any crime, this cannot be described as just.

When the circumstances of their detention result in such psychological disturbance that they go blind, or lose their ability to walk, this is inhumane. (As reported on 4 corners so maybe news to the general public but most refugee advocates are aware of these cases.)

How anyone can try and defend a system that drives people mad, that locks up innocent people for 3, 4, 5, 6 years and counting is beyond me. In January 2005 an 12month old baby born in Xmas Island detention centre was granted refugee status. Her parents had previously been refused as refugees. So the baby, a refugee, had to stay in detention. Only after lobbying and media attention, DIMIA decided the parents' were refugees too, granted them visas and the family were released last week.

Col, I agree there has to be a system to assess asylum claims - but not this one. It just plain doesn't work, is very expensive and very damaging. I'm with Miranda, and will continue to work for the end of indefinite mandatory detention and other cruel features of current system.

I see that this thread is just about exhausted. The xenophobes resort to illogical and unfounded statements, and odd evangelical red herrings.

"Col Rouge": you don't make much sense here, and I doubt that you have credible sources for your information. Presumably, if asylum seekers were actually "economic immigrants" they would be found out upon investigation. That this has not proven so in the overwhelming majority of cases in Australia, with or without mandatory detention, would disprove your argument. And with respect to diseases, many more non-Australians come here on tourist, business and student visas than do asylum seekers, and they are not subject to medical tests.

"BOAZ-David": in addition to making offensive comments about those who democratically protest against our immoral treatment of refugees, you also make unfounded assumptions about others of us who oppose these shameful policies. I am not a socialist, and my objection to our recent appalling treatment of refugees is not based on Marxism or any other -ism. The credibility of your argument is further weakened by the inclusion of an irrelevant and inane biblical quotation.

Well said garra,I think you may have closed this forum - well done. Regards, numbat

Maybe the post is nearly closed but I challenge the suggestion that is only "lefties" who are opposed to mandatory detention. Would this include the brave Liberal backbenchers who have openly challenged Howard and Vanstone? Dick Smith? Malcolm Fraser and John Valder? Most church leaders in Australia? Many prominent lawyers ane mental health experts?
Sure the Greens lean to the left but the Australian Democrats? And how about Family First who are opposed to the mistreatment of refugees on Christian grounds.
Amnesty International believes the current mandatory detention regime in Australia breaches human rights standards. Most of Amnesty's work involves seeking release of prisoners of conscience in totalitarian countries - it shames me that Australia falls into the category of a country which requires the attention of Amnesty International.
Still, judging by some of the comments posted I can understand why Amnesty would have concerns about the direction our Governent is taking us.