Dear Wobbly one..

Now...you know why there is a saying "The Devil is in the Detail"

(a) Article 31(1) requires that refugees shall not be penalized solely by reason of unlawful entry or because, being in need of refuge and protection, they remain illegally in a country.
(b) Refugees are not required to have come directly from territories where their life or freedom was threatened.

The question I ask is this:

'What where the lobbying forces and the underlying ideologies about a 'new world order' which lay behind such a decision ?

As far as I am concerned, Australia should RESCIND any connection with such a treaty OR.. add an exemption proviso (we do have a number, I'm not aware of any re this matter) to the effect that in the interests of sovereignty and national security we REJECT the findings of the 'expert' panel on this matter.

The real world impact of an interpretation as you have shown, is that national sovereignty ceases to exist, and that assylum shoppers actually run our country.

We also have to ask "Who's interests does this serve" in global geopolitics? Nothing happens without someones 'interests' being at the root of it. To what degree did those "Interests" effect the findings of the committee ?

If those "interests" are in conflict with our own... we have to draw a line.

Its always worth considering this.

Divergence.. WELL SAID mate.. nice to see some common sense and well argued positions being presented here.. Katie.. learn from this, ur too emotional.

Hey Wobbles.. that last post of yours was very good. On the manipulation of public opinion etc.. right on !...

The trick is.. for us to be sufficiently confident about our position regarding issues, that we are not sucked in by such manipulation.

We are most manipulatable when our peceived interests are threatened.
If the feeling of threat is based on purely greed, we have a problem. If it is based on sound reasoning, history and experience, we will not be so vulnerable.

There is plenty of room in proper interpretation of the expert committees views to rule out assylum shoppers who came via a number of countries to here, specially that they may have relatives already here.. = "Family reunion by stealth and cunning"

We need to separate the individual cases like the Baktiaris from the broader picture of policy.

Katie

They didn't want to go back to Pakistan (where he had work) because of a 'fear' ? good grief.. that would apply FARRRRR more realistically to EVERY single one of the TWO POINT NINE MILLION Christians in Pakistan who are persecuted every freaking day !

Would you accept 2,900,000 new Christian Aussies?

How many thugs fleeing the law in their own countries have landed here claiming 'asylum'?
How can you tell the sincere from the insincere? What harm are you doing to your own society and your own country by taking people on their own say so?
Consider the harm that is being rained down on Australians through a certain group who were taken in and given shelter and life then have turned around and threatened us with bloody terrorism?
When is a refugee not a refugee but a violent,fanatical, killer who will repay our kindness with the worst he can do.
Please spare us little homilies on how racist WE are.

The unfortunate reality is that Wobbles won't admit to the fact that most of the "ethnic hatred" eminates from our Muslim population and political correctness is the vehicle for their bile and hatred.

Katie,
The facts are that you and Ms Sheperd have used the assylum seekers children simply as an emotional argument in your quest to open our borders, with no thought for what is best for Australia. Neither of you have put forward any practical way of dealing with the problem of illegal entries. You want us to receive them and let them loose into the community.

By the way, after the survivors of the Siev X got back to Indonesia, the boats stopped coming. What happened to the "hundreds" of assylum seekers waiting to come here? Where did they go? Or did they simply stay in Indonesia? Does anyone know?

It is good to see they are not coming here for now.

The unfortunate thing is that Arjay can't see that the hatred against Muslims is just as institutionalised in Western society.

People will believe anything that justifies their personal prejudices- whether it's children overboard, 4-star luxury detention centres, hordes of refugees coming here to rape our white-women or even whether or not a dingo killed Arazia Chamberlain.

They will latch on to any outrageous statement made by some insignificant crackpot or pore over obscure religious texts to find signs of conspiracies when what they are really tring to do is reassure themselves that their personal prejudices are valid.

Even after some things are demonstrably proven to be untrue, some people refuse to accept they may actually be wrong.

Yes (some of) the Muslims do have a problem but it's certainly not all one-sided.

When it all comes down to basics, the facts are for many in these Forums appears to be that

1. "We don't like Muslims"
2. "We don't want them here"

Everything else is just window dressing and grandstanding (myself included).