Did others also note that after the survivours from the Seiv X sinking arrived back in Indonesia and told their story, the boats stopped comming here. Those hundreds (or thousands) waiting to get on boats suddenly found other places to go where the journey was less hazardous.

Obviously, Australia is not the only option for Middle East people proporting to be refugees. I wonder if our free accomadation and free medical and social security had anything to do with them making us their first choice.

I feel for these people who seek a better life and were unlucky enough to be born in Countries where peace is a problem. However, I dont think it is right or fair that only those with the 'means and contacts' have an avenue of escape and are supported. People come here claiming to be so persecuted in their own Country that they had to flee for thier life. If you can organise to travel half way round the world in numbers to get to a country of choice then how persecuted can you be?

It just doesn't fit in with the picture of a true refugee that is being persecuted. I only see economic refugees who cant get here any other way, but know that Australia is the place to come as they have "rights" and "entitlements", and who appear to be in more danger of dying getting to Australia than anything else. Yet they take that chance and often put their children and families at risk of death for the sake of living a economically more supported and stable life in Australia and it doesn't take a genius to work out why. Bango got it in one.

If safety was thier main concern they wouldn't put their family and children at risk to come here. They would go to the closest Country of Muslim faith. If they wont let them in or if all Muslim countries are having problems with their own people then that says alot about the Muslim people and maybe these people should stay at home and try to change the culture and attitude in their own backyards.

The Immigration Act is quite clear. People arriving without documentation in Australia are regarded as illegal/unlawful and will be detained. This is a bipartisan policy, instigated by the ALP. Fortunately for them, they haven't been in government for so long, that they have never had to enforce it.

Illegals can call themselves asylum seekers or whatever they wish; the facts and the requirement for detention remain.

Most of the Mickey Mouse, loony left opinions on this site appear to come from people who have never read anything - including the daily papers - in their lives.

Zorro,

Hear Hear! I had already made up my mind to ignore Marilyn the Maenad and a few of the other loons who think they have particular powers of persuasion. They don't have the intelligence to know that others feel the same way about their opinions as they do and, therefore, will not change them merely because they are harrassed every time they wish to express those opinions.

M I would like to take a crack at your questions if that Ok .
[1] No they should lock up the parents for putting them at risk!.Are you suggesting we take the kids into main stream? We dont arrest the kids just the parents.
2 No three months and if we cant find out who they are by then tough.
3No I do not see the difference between black or white because there are white terrorits as well. Not all terrorists or unsavoury people are are black.


4 This question is putting words in peoples mouths and is not a true reflection of what i beleive.

5 not clear question.

6 Oh M and I thought you were serious . Silly me. Does this mean I now must unpack. dam.

Come on m give us a smile OK. Many people dont agree with you and some do thats what this is for.

More still just like to wind you up because you always bite. Your not so bad M and actually very aware of whats going on when some of us are asleep.
I admire your dedication and some of your thoughts while remaining Pro Australian.

There is no harm meant

“Yep I am biased and proud of it”

O dear. Don’t be biased be balanced. Marilyn I don’t understand how you can have a conviction that your views are right or reasonable while thinking they are biased.

I’ll have a go at your questions….

1. Absolutely not. But keeping children in detention with their parents or guardians is probably fair and reasonable. I can imagine some of them being terrified if they are taken away from the adults they know and depend on.

2. We should not lock up asylum seekers for any longer than it is necessary to determine their refugee status. For the vast majority, this has meant a relatively short time in detention, despite a lack of papers and of cooperation from many of them. You have got to realise just how difficult it has been to get a fair concept of how real the plight is for many of these people, especially when the Australian authorities knew at the time of the Tampa that there was a great deal of opportunism going on, with people gathering in Indonesia ready to jump on boats to Australia when they could have sought refuge much closer to home. Particularly long detention has only occurred for the really difficult cases. There may have been some who were detained after their cases were resolved, until their entire group was resolved. There is merit in keeping groups together.

3. We have to make sure that we treat all asylum seekers in the same manner, and are seen to be doing so.

4. The distinction between refugees and opportunists is very difficult. There is no doubt some overlap. Those who think of all asylum seekers as opportunists are far too one-eyed for my liking.

5. I wouldn’t propose to keep them out. But they must swear an oath to put Australia first and to forego practices that are in conflict with ours. Just what practices this includes should have been worked out and elucidated ages ago. This goes for everyone. We should not single out Muslims

Marilyn, I am also interested to know what you think of my post on mandatory detention under ‘Our Australian Blindside’ (13/5) http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=4441#41450