The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > A refugee’s story > Comments

A refugee’s story : Comments

By Andrew Bartlett, published 8/1/2007

A measured and moving piece (regardless of one's views on the refugee issue), with a wholly unexpected punch-line. Best Blogs 2006.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All
Nice to hear, aside from the car crash. Sad that after so many trials and tribulations the tale reached such a hollow conclusion, but I suppose that is life. Perhaps someday Australia will learn a few things from its southern neighbour when it comes to refugee processing. How New Zealand can handle refugee applications in short order while Australia leaves people languishing in camps is beyond me, and the clearest evidence that such camps are motivated purely by political reasons.
Posted by TurnRightThenLeft, Monday, 8 January 2007 1:17:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew....what are you really saying here ?

Are you simply trying to damage Howard, promote Dems relevance? (lost cause mate) stick up for 'poor refugees' ?

I'm always cynical about politicians who latch onto controversial issues and seek to make political capital out of them. Its like the person who waves his $100 dollar note around before giving it to the poor.... so he will BE NOTICED.

No amount of bleeding heart-ism will change the crucial fact of the incompatablity of Muslims as a community with Australia. This should be reflected in a seriously specific selection policy for both refugees and immigrants which takens this fundamental incompatability into account. They should be processed compassionately and then sent on to a country of cultural/religious compatability.

Individually they are very nice people.. mostly, BUT..as a "community" this is what they can be like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_kyNIevsIs
and this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?search=&mode=related&v=Y85IfOBl_a4
and this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yiu26Mo_UBo&feature=RecentlyWatched&page=1&t=t&f=b

The UN Court of Human Rights found that

["nothing obliged States to tolerate the existence of political parties that sought the destruction of democracy and the rule of law."] http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/70716

...and any group which is fundamentally political (which Islam is) and which seeks to usurp our law and replace it with Sharia law is not welcome here.

Would your Muslim friend be willing to defend Australia to the point of killing a Muslim invader ? Hardly, their religion forbids it.
So, while they might be lovable people, and deserving of compassion, we are also deserving of the right to preserve our freedom and values and that means they will be better off in a Muslim country.

Australia will only 'be' Australia as we know it, if we preserve it.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 8 January 2007 1:44:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What am I really saying here?!

Gee, I think I'm saying I met a really nice guy who along with his wife and young children were put through absolute hell for no good reason, and it's a terrible shame that he got killed just when they finally got the chance to have a secure and safe future. What the hell do you think I was saying?

do you prefer politicians who assist people in need and try to ensure they are treated fairly or ones who just look after their own interests, pander to prejudice, reinforce ignorance and use taxpayers' money to buy themselves votes (no need to answer that - it's already pretty clear)

As for 'compatibility', as my piece and the various articles it linked to all showed, Ali was a fantastic asset to Australia and widely admired by many people who met him. Under your criteria, that would count for nothing, solely because of his (presumed) religious beliefs. I don't know what type of Australia you're trying to 'preserve', but that sure doesn't sound like any Australia I've ever known.

You're a sad individual David. Your hatred of Muslims is matched only by your ignorance of Islam.
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Monday, 8 January 2007 3:08:56 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew, in your travels have you ever been to the terminal ward at Westmead Children's Hospital? Have you listened to the tragic story of the family who watch their 6-year-old son slowly slipping away? Have you offered comfort to that family? Perhaps you told that family that you'd ask the prime minister to pledge more money for medical research.

Have you visited any of the 105,304 homeless Australians and told them that you'd take up their cause and lobby the government to find more digs for those in need?

In 1998, of the 2683 Australian suicides, 446 were in the 15-24-year-old age group. Are you working tirelessly to reduce that figure?

Andrew, in 1996-7 supported accommodation was sought by 21,000 Australian women fleeing domestic violence. An estimated 12,000 children accompanied those women. Are you helping out in any way to patch up those broken relationships and offer hope to those families?

Andrew, it seems there is plenty of work here in Australia for those who want to do good deeds.
Posted by Sage, Monday, 8 January 2007 4:13:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I was one of the compilers of BBP2006, and this was one of the pieces that came across my in-tray, and that I recommended to Ken Parish and Nick Gruen.

FTR, I disagree with Andrew's take on the refugee issue, but that didn't stop me recommending this piece for the final cut. Why? It's a great piece of writing. It tells an elemental story that rises above politics. And it reminds all of us of our mortality. The tag-line I wrote for it - "A measured and moving piece (regardless of one's views on the refugee issue), with a wholly unexpected punch-line" - was designed to defuse any silliness. Clearly, I failed in that aim.

Australia had its refugee debate over the Tampa, and the electorate spoke its mind. It's now time to drop the politics and appreciate Andrew's piece for what it is.
Posted by skepticlawyer, Monday, 8 January 2007 5:01:30 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gee whiz Sage thats a bit harsh on poor old AB isnt it?

The man is out there in the community everyday pushing his leftist agenda on us the unsuspecting majority? Poor bugger, still with the weight of having to pander to every grubby minority group while selling out his constituents and the added task of shafting the blue collars in his electorate through bringing more unskilled immigrants, he might have a tough time getting up to the childrens ward although im sure he does around election time.

ABs probably not a bad bloke its just a pity him and his ilk dont find the ordinary people, think AUSSIE, as a cause instead of the woolly, black armband, civil liberties kind of cause more to his Bollinger caviar tastes. Just doesnt sound as good at dinner parties does it Andy.
Posted by SCOTTY, Monday, 8 January 2007 5:16:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sage what on earth is your point?

That because there are lots of things to do, and lots of people to care about, that unless you can do it all you should do none.

And we wonder why thoughtful, sincere politicians are so rare.
Posted by Anna Winter, Monday, 8 January 2007 5:38:56 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
yes, there is plenty of work in Australia for those who want to do good deeds. That's why I've been working for years with people, of whom Ali was one, who were in Australia. As do many many other people of course. Clearly for some people, helping out a refugee is an act deserving of abuse and contempt, but thankfully such attitudes are fairly rare in Australia, which is mostly a compassionate and rational country.

Contrary to Scotty's bigotry, I consider all 'AUSSIES' in need to be deserving of support, not just those that fit your narrow prejudice. But helping out poor people, the homeless or the sick probably doesn't sound cool at your dinner parties, does it Scotty - I guess they're all just bludgers to you. You're obviously too busy still spreading lies like "bringing in unskilled migrants shafts blue collar workers" and other long disproved myths. But why try build a better country for everyone when you can just take the easy route of slagging off easy targets? Believe what you want if it makes you feel better. You're obviously not interested in reality anyway.

I have done many of the things you talk about Sage, and will continue to do so. Assistance shouldn't be selective dependent on skin colour or religion. It is however worth noting that in none of the examples you give are people suffering and being harmed and families being deliberately destroyed as a deliberate conscious decision of govenrment policy. Unlike some of the other tragedies of life, the suffering deliberately inflicted on those Aussies who are asylum seekers and refugees as a result of our own laws and policies is easily reversible. Thankfully, some of it now has been, which is to the benefit of our entire community.
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Monday, 8 January 2007 6:29:04 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew....
It will clearly take a while..but we will get there.
I don't HATE all Muslims, but I have no time whatsoever for those who overtly seek to 'Sharia'-ize this country, to me thats War and they are the enemy, plain and simple.

As I said..POLICY is the key.. One cannot let personal affection or friendship interfere with sound national policy. You think I'm inexperienced, ?
While in Malaysia, the CHILDREN of the Muslims who owed their lives to our medical work, i.e. those who were only alive because of Christian compassion, turned the water off to us during a water shortage. By 'us', I mean a community of hundreds of people. This is called the "Pharaoh who knew not Joseph" sydrome. It matters not a bit, how nice you are to ONE generation, what matters in the end, is how their children and their grandchildren regard you, and what values permeate their community.
"Love what Allah loves and Hate what Allah hates(thats you and me)" is the Islam of the Quran.
Here is one such http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anjem_Choudary
Called for Britain to become an Islamic State.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/09/10/nterr110.xml

You claim I don't know much about Islam. Really ? On what basis do you claim that ? I've been studying it from the more original sources for quite some time now. I've lived under it. Been forced to display Pro Muslim election posters on my Christian home, had guns shoved in my face, but that is just emotive, my point is... the Islam I know, is the one which rages in the streets of London yelling BEHEAD THOSE WHO INSULT ISLAM.... now.. did you see the video ? did you see how MANY there were ? I'll guarantee that back at their homes, they will be the nicest most hospitable people you can find.
But they were screaming for our blood on the streets in numbers the police could not handle.

You may disagree, but that is true Islam. I mean.."Quranic" Islam, which other kind can there be ?

Ali's passing is a true tragedy on a family level.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Monday, 8 January 2007 6:33:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi BD, been a little while, my new workplace is less accomodating to using work time to post on chat forums, but its great to see some things never change, may your campaign against muslims be long and uselees my friend!

I just finished reading 'to kill a mockingbird' and one line stuck in my head, while Jem is theorising and frustrating himself about the four types of people in maycomb county (normal folk, cunninghmas, Ewalls and Niggers)his little sister puts the whole world into perspective in one neat little line, "Nah Jeem I think theres only really one types of folk. Folk"

You might be able to get some sleep at night if you just accept this BD, were all flawed, picking on one mob of folk don't do Jack.

Good article by the way Andrew.
Posted by Carl, Monday, 8 January 2007 7:16:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HD wrote:

"I disagree with Andrew's take on the refugee issue"

What do you disagree with Helen?

And which the blazes did this national debate over tampa happen
Posted by Rainier, Monday, 8 January 2007 7:41:17 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew,

I find the poor and homeless Aussies far more deserving of support and assistance than you might imagine. I just think that importing a natural born enemy that will ultimately destroy our way of life and lower conditions for our children is morally corrupt and they will its to late to stop it now, like cockroaches to a cornflake they will slowly but surely eat away at the system till it crumbles. France is a shining example of multiculturalism 10% muslim and growing, last week 400 cars burnt, no go areas for police, sounds like parts of Lakemba doesnt it Andrew.

I believe in fixing Aboriginal health, getting our own homeless off the streets and mandatory sentences. We cannot afford more centrelink customers Andrew, and thats exactly what were importing, that and more left wing voters but you already new that.

Im a former soldier with combat experience in Iraq and East Timor and have seen first hand up close and personal like what muslims are apt to do. I hope to Christ we dont have to see it here its just not worth the risk. Its like bringing a dangerous pitbull to play with your kids, best left alone.

We have plenty of problems here of our own to fix Andrew, Im not a biggot Im a realist, its your policies that seem unreal to me.

Mohhumud was a pedarist
Posted by SCOTTY, Monday, 8 January 2007 8:32:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Are we going to have HD giving a running commentary on every blogg she 'selected'. Please no
Posted by Rainier, Monday, 8 January 2007 10:06:55 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Quite so, Rainier... I thought something very similar :D

I hope davo feels a bit better now, having had a textual dump on Andrew Bartlett's very moving story. Personally, I'd much rather have someone like Ali Sarwari as a neighbour, workmate or customer than someone who expresses such cretinous opinions as davo does.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 8 January 2007 10:41:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
First of all please forgive me for my bad English. I am one of aforementioned migrants from a Muslim country.

The thing that I found rather wrong in comments by BOAZ_David and other friendly people is that they don’t notice most of Muslim migrant and refugees are fled from the Sharia and Islamic laws in their countries. They fled because they share more values with Australian culture than middle eastern laws. We have plenty of Islamic laws in middle east and from my experience a person who are willing to left everything behind and come to a country on the other side of the world and start everything from the beginning and learn a new language, is doing this because he want to get rid of those values and laws.

We immigrate to Australia, Canada and USA for the same reasons that few centuries ago for religious reasons and few decades ago for political reasons, European fled from Europe. If we wanted to live by Islamic law we never left middle east. Labelling people Muslim because they are from an Islamic country, and labelling people extremist because they are Muslim is wrong. Most of people that I know don’t believe in the things that you mentioned about Islam and you can say that will make them non-Muslims, which is exactly what Islamic governments like Taliban think about them and the exact reason they fled from places like Afghanistan and despite all the hardship came to Australia.

The problem with extremists is that a few dangerous people (I think rightfully) receive more attention than the majority of a community. So please don’t judge ten of thousands of people based on acts of few and have a little bit compassion for people who fled from governments which are exact representatives of those Islamic values that you mentioned.
Posted by Ariel, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 4:59:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well done Davo - an 8 sentence comment, and every single sentence contains at least one inaccuracy, sometimes more. That takes real dedication. People complain about politicians being liars, and then when we tell the truth, you complain about that.

By the way, the Sudanese refugees have been brought here by the federal government, not by me, through our offshore refugee and humanitarian program - a move I welcome and which will undoubtedly be to our country's long-term benefit, just as past refugees have been shown to be, including Ali Sarwari in the few short years before he was forced to leave. But no matter, according to Scotty, Ali was our 'natural born enemy'. According to BOAZ_D he was "the enemy, plain and simple." Go figure.
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 5:24:35 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew
Your story has well crafted -you have all the choicest emotionally loaded images- designed to pull middle class Australian heart-strings:
-The innocence of a little girl forlornly looking through a Dachauesque wire fence.
-The salt-of-the-earth character of the parents .
-The insensitive bureaucracy .
-Even the tragic ending .

But what you omitted to include was, that often:
-The refugees have by-passed many countries (a number of them Islamic - some like Malaysia both ‘democratic’ & Islamic ) to get to Australia.
-They have cunningly bided their time, hiding out in a third ( Islamic) country, awaiting the right opportunity to move on to Australia.
-They have often used bribes & deceit to pave their way.
-And judging by the amount & type of baggage many carry, their little odyssey was no desperate run-for-your-lives dash .

And Andrew you left out the ending, & the best part many such stories-It all to commonly goes like this:
A refugee family having gain its residency,somewhere thereafter rediscovers their “roots’- aided & abetted by multiculturalism , and the women of the family are suddnely back at square one.

They have escaped the wire enclosures of Nauru but its simply been replaced by a black burka or abaya & virtual house arrest, for the rest of their her lives.

(The same young girl who in scene one, stood forlornly behind a wire fence, now older, in the final scene, stands forlornly behind a suburban security door-unable to venture out unaccompanied)

But by this point however Andrew & his acolytes have lost interest – its one thing to criticize fellow Anglos, but to criticize ethnic values –well, thats simply is not done under Democrat ethos
Posted by Horus, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 5:42:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Come off it Horus. I've done well over 400 posts on my blog - this is just one of them, written a year ago, which someone else for their own reasons thought stood out as being particularly good - even though they disagree with my own views on the wider policy issues regarding asylum seekers (which surprises me a bit for a libertarian, but that's a separate matter).

I described the facts of my contact with this man and family. I am sorry that you and some other people find those facts so confronting that you need to respond with such aggresion, bile and distortion, but I don't see that as a reason why I should apologise for telling the truth.

I omitted to include all the other extra things you list, because that would be untrue, fundamentally misleading and grossly dishonest.

As I said above, people complain about politicians being liars, but when we tell the truth, you complain about that and want us to tell lies that fit your prejudices anyway. You've got shockjocks and tabloids for that, you don't need me to do it.
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 7:21:29 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
For what it is ("a refugee's story"), it is clearly a sad one indeed. It reminds me of the story of a Darfuri, Nourasham, who managed to escape the genocide to Chad with her family only to have her husband killed because he tried to protect her sister from being raped.

Wherever we turn there is tragedy. For every tragedy we tend to seek a scapegoat. As we search our passions rise to a boil. And as we become more passionate we allow our judgement to be clouded. If ever this was showcased, it is here in this forum. The eagerness to assume the intentions/beliefs of a poster seem to go hand in hand with the apparent inability to view a user's comments with perspective.

Please forgive the self-righteous tones. I just feel it would be more rewarding for all the idealists amongst us to not neglect the grey areas in our theorising rather than limiting ourselves to the black and white. As for the issue of our immigration policy, it is clearly a complex one. Most posters here (regardless of the manners with which their comments were expressed) made some valid points which need to be considered when discussing the aforementioned topic.

So sure it can often be entertaining and/or amusing to make sly witty remarks (or blatant digs) in an attempt to carry out a point, but let's not forget that the reason why we are all here discussing such issues is because there simply aren't logical solutions which are ideal (ooops - in my opinion!)
Posted by meliorator, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 7:55:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew, perhaps HD is only against Ukrainian refugees? Especially those illiterate Ukrainian taxi drivers types
Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 8:52:15 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew
I applaud and respect what you have achieved and what you continue to try and achieve for the dispossed and disadvantaged in our community.
I don't have any respect for John Howard and I had none for Kim Beazley because of their inability to support and nurture the weakest in our society and for their lack of compassion.We'll see how Rudd goes.
I have no respect for people who criticise others and then haven't got the guts to put their name to the comment.They cannot be taken seriously.
Brave little bullies,I have been dealing with refugees since 1972.
But machos let me tell you a little more. When I left school I broke in horses in the Kimberlys and my best teachers and off siders were aboriginals.I got called up for National Service and became a very specialised soldier.I put myself through uni working on an oil rig and driving a taxi.
I joined a federal government department and was posted to Pakistan twice which included periods inside Soviet occupied Afghanistan taking pictures of Soviet installations,airfields,tanks and radio fascilities.While these tasks were being undertaken there was from time to time military activity.
I have worked in Iran, Saudi Arabia,Kuwait and the Yemen.I have also
worked in South Africa, Sri Lanka and Indonesia.In all of these countries there were refugees both from internal and external causes and one of our responsibilities was to help and get to know them.
I have had tense moments( confrontations) with people of every religion,colour and political persuasion, mainly because people are people and from time to time they get upset,sometimes with justification and sometimes not.
I worked on the Refugee Review Tribunal for five years and witnessed at first hand the political pressure that this government sought to bring to bear on Tribunal decision making.
If the anonymous bullies wish to be taken seriously in the future put your names to your comments and apologise to Andrew Bartlett.Judging from your comments he has achieved far more than any of you have so far managed.As an Australian I am truely ashamed of you.
Bruce Haigh
Posted by Bruce Haigh, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 9:35:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew
I applaud and respect what you have achieved and what you continue to try and achieve for the dispossed and disadvantaged in our community.
I don't have any respect for John Howard and I had none for Kim Beazley because of their inability to support and nurture the weakest in our society and for their lack of courage and compassion. We'll see how Rudd goes.
I have no respect for people who criticise others in this forum and then haven't the guts to put their name to the comment.
I have been involved with refugees since 1972.
But let me tell you a little more. When I left school I broke in horses in the Kimberlys and my best teachers and off siders were aboriginals.I got called up for National Service and became a very specialised soldier.I put myself through uni working on an oil rig and driving a taxi.
I joined a federal government department and was posted to Pakistan twice which included periods inside Soviet occupied Afghanistan taking pictures of Soviet installations,airfields,tanks and radio facilities.While these tasks were being undertaken there was, from time to time, military activity.
I have worked in Iran, Saudi Arabia,Kuwait and the Yemen.I have also
worked in South Africa, Sri Lanka and Indonesia.In all of these countries there were refugees both from internal and external causes and one of our responsibilities was to help and get to know them.
I have had tense moments( confrontations) with people of every religion,colour and political persuasion, mainly because people are people and from time to time they get upset,sometimes with justification and sometimes not.
I worked on the Refugee Review Tribunal for five years and witnessed at first hand the political pressure that this government sought to bring to bear on Tribunal decision making.
If the anonymous bullies wish to be taken seriously in the future put your names to your comments and apologise to Andrew Bartlett.Judging from your comments he has achieved far more than any of you have so far managed.As an Australian I am truely ashamed of you.
Bruce Haigh
Posted by Bruce Haigh, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 9:38:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Come on Bruce, MILITARY ACTIVITY, Im a former soldier and most of the family are, I dont want to scream fraud but there will be those who will.
Mate you were a shiny arse and we all know those who know you. Mate your just another in a long line of jokers whom the destruction of this fair country gives a nice fuzzy feeling to.

Good luck in your retirement out Mudgee way and Im sure ABC will let you natter on about this and that occasionally when global warmings getting a bit cool other than that a bucket mouth is a bucket mouth and prone to dribble.

CYA Bruce Ol Mate
Posted by SCOTTY, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 11:09:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Scotty,

Bruce is expressing an opinion about the article written by Andrew Bartlett.

I fail to see how anything you have said here in relevant to engaging in an online discussion.

C'mon, you can do better than that, surely?
Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 9 January 2007 11:26:50 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course Australia can afford to be generous to a few thousand refugees a year, although we need to be wary in view of the mass influx in Europe and North America as chain migration effects set in. The harsh treatment of this particular family, who were almost certainly genuine and recognised as such by New Zealand, can be reasonably attributed to the Howard government's attempt to deflect attention from its mass migration policy, a policy supported by Andrew Bartlett, because "we can't keep Australia to ourselves", as he said on another thread.

I haven't seen specifically Australian studies, but a number of US ones show mass migration does indeed shaft blue collar workers. There are references on the Center for Immigration Studies site (www.cis.org) to a number of such studies, including the 1997 National Academy of Sciences report "The New Americans". Prof. George Borjas of the Harvard Economics Dept. (hardly a place where people are hired to promulgate myths), himself a Cuban refugee, found "the analysis indicates that immigration lowers the wage of competing workers: a 10 percent increase in supply reduces wages by 3 to 4 percent" (Borjas, Quarterly J. of Economics, 2003, pp. 1335-1374, also at www.borjas.com). There was about an 11% increase in US labour supply due to immigration between 1980 and 2000, and Borjas estimates that it had varying effects on different types of workers, but that it reduced the wages of the least skilled workers by 8.9% and of college graduates by 4.9%. In a panel discussion at CIS in 2001, Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy Institute said, "The vast majority of the research shows that immigration, especially at the lower end, does lower wages." It is amazing that people who readily accept that Cyclone Larry raised the price of bananas refuse to believe that supply and demand also apply to labour and housing.
Posted by Divergence, Wednesday, 10 January 2007 9:29:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew,
The real measure of compassion/charity/high ideals is NOT how much of the tax payers money one can hand out – but rather how much of ones own money/goods one has given.

It would be enlightening to know how much of their parliamentary salary & perks the pro-refugee politicians have given over to the support the refugees.

If their largesse matches their posturing/sermonising , they should all be paupers by now.
Posted by Horus, Wednesday, 10 January 2007 6:10:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am curious.

Is there ever a reason for denying people permission to enter Australia because of their beliefs?

Holocaust denier David Irving was denied permission to visit Australia. Was this the right thing to do?

I am not equating Islam with Holocaust denial although, as a matter of plain fact, many Muslims are Holocaust deniers. I am trying to establish a principle here.

Does it make a difference if a belief is based on religion? Should Australia deny entry to members of the White supremacist "Christian Identity" sect?

What proportion of adherents to a particular faith have to believe something before we say that's part of the doctrine? Suppose it turned out, as I believe to be the case, that the majority of Muslims deny the Holocaust. Do we allow in Muslim immigrants but ban David Irving?

The reaction of people like Andrew Bartlett is to deny the issue exists. They will repeat the mantra that "true" Islam is a "religion of peace" and that it is only a "tiny" minority of "Islamist fanatics" who cause problems. But, objectively speaking, is this correct?

What is actually being taught in Madrassahs in Pakistan?

Another reaction is to label people like me "racist" for raising the issue. I've long understood that a "racist" is someone who wins an argument with a Leftie.

I guess I can summarise this post with two questions:

Is there ever a case for barring people from Australia because of their beliefs?

If the answer to the above is "no" should we allow David Irving to visit Australia?
Posted by Stephany, Saturday, 13 January 2007 4:38:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephany, So tell me (succinctly) why you are not a racit or harbour racist beliefs? Its a fair question isn't it?
Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 13 January 2007 5:26:05 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephany,
Apparently only if you deny the holocaust can one be denied entry.
If you want to enslave the population into your particular brand of fantasy then come on in brother, bring your silly hat with you and insult us all, seems the way.
Its only racist if your ANGLO seems the order of the day, I dont believe in Irvings rants but I do think he has as much right to visit here as much as Muslims with a similar bent even perhaps more so considering he is a subject of the Commonwealth.
Its a reverse racism that is being implemented on Anglo peoples Western countries wide, you see Stephany it gives the leftist moonbats a warm fuzzy feeling to marginalise and discriminate against those of thier own race and culture in the name of human rights and civil liberties. 9 times out of 10 they dont have to live next door to what they are importing and then when we get upset by our strange new neighbours they have the hide to call us racists while they live in thier nice safe suburbs.
Paul Keating in his chase for minority votes allowed Hilali to have Australian Citizenship even after being considered an undesirable. Keating shall always have that to brag about and being the worlds greatest treasurer. His silence is deafening
Posted by SCOTTY, Saturday, 13 January 2007 5:30:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here we go again with the “reverse racism” argument which asserts when the victims of racism organize or act against racism and oppression, they are automatically / also practicing racism.

It’s not unlike the equivalent of men crying out they’re being oppressed by “feminazis' but still hold all the power.

If I could reverse racism I would not do it, sot you should be aware that naming it, identifying it, discussing it is not a reverse of its impact on those it most affects. It does not flip reality just because you think it has.

But this is what you purport happens.

Racism is structurally and institutionally embedded in society.

It’s more than just name calling.

How does mentioning racism or addressing racism constitute reverse racism?

And people who do promote attacks and racist ideas like David Irwin should not be allowed in Australia. We have enough home grown varieties to deal with.
Posted by Rainier, Saturday, 13 January 2007 10:21:34 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rainier:

Judging from your post you believe we have the right to bar people from entering Australia because they hold beliefs the majority of us profess to find unacceptable.

Does that mean we should also bar people who adhere to a faith that teaches:

--Homosexuals and adulterers should be stoned to death?

--Rape victims who dress "immodestly" are to blame for their own misfortune?

I'm just trying to get a sense of how far you would go.

You ask me to tell you "why you are not a racit or harbour racist beliefs?"

What have I written that could reasonably be construed as racist?

Just to set the record straight, I consider Holocaust deniers to be scumbags.

So now tell me:

---What beliefs justify exclusion from migration to Australia?

---How do you establish who holds those beliefs? (They aren't all going to make them public)

Perhaps instead of implying I am a racist you could have a go at answering these questions.
Posted by Stephany, Sunday, 14 January 2007 1:10:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephany: "Is there ever a reason for denying people permission to enter Australia because of their beliefs?"

Of course not. As you imply in a subsequent comment, there is no reliable way for one person to establish what another believes unless the latter articulates their belief in some way. On the other hand, there might well be occasions when someone, who has expressed offensive, seditious or otherwise abhorrent ideas, may be denied an entry visa by the Australian government.

It might also depend upon why they wanted to enter Australia. If David Irving had applied for a tourist visa (and conformed to the conditions therein), then that would be quite a different situation than if he applied for a business visa in order to conduct a speaking tour. If there was some way of proving it, I'd be willing to wager that a substantial number of tourists to Australia over the years have been Holocaust deniers.

In short, people should be judged on what they do, rather than what they purportedly believe.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 14 January 2007 7:34:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ Morgan
Actually its rather apt that David Irving & Holocaust deniers should be brought into the discussion,because there are more similarities between David Irving & Hilali than first meets the (uneducated) eye.

You see, Islam has more than its share of lesser & greater holocausts.( Sudan, Indonesia & Southern Thailand -& that’s only recent history)And people like Hilali are always either justifying them, or denying them.

And on a related theme:
Isn't it funny- one can criticise the Nazis -and make all sorts of wild claims about its former followers, ( though just on the law of averages it must have had its share of 'good people' too) yet no one labels them a Naziophobe.

But if one criticises Islam, -one frequently gets labelled a Islamophobe.The moral seems to be, if your get enough people following a particular creed, it becomes respectable
Posted by Horus, Sunday, 14 January 2007 5:38:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Stephany,

1, I did not imply you were racist, I simply asked if you thought you harboured racist beliefs, like everyone else at some stage of their lives, including me. From experience I found the most racist are those who deny they ever have or think racism is a superficial to human relationships and who deny society has bee historically organised racially and hierarchically.

2. Both of the beliefs you list can be found in the Christian bible and have been publicly espoused by people like Fred Nile and other lunatics. Fred Nile got elected and so did Pauline Hanson. My point is that the problem is much deeper than simply examining who comes here and who should stay.

3. Clearly beliefs that eminate from people or organisations incite violence and racism and sexism and other forms of hate should not be allow to enter. Read 2 again.

Is this good enough for you?

Or am I being unAustralian by being to lenient on Islam? I just find this hysteria and lynch mob mentality a bit rich from people who have yet to resolve their own legitimacy as immigrants with the original inhabitants of this land. The illegal acquisition and the unresolved status of Indigenous people is always the ‘elephant’ in tht room when I witness these types of discussions about nationalism and security.

What do you think?
Posted by Rainier, Sunday, 14 January 2007 6:07:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rainier,
Id like to know a bit about you? Are you Aboriginal?
Is this why you feel affiliation with refugees?
Is hating your country a way for you to feel your getting square with us whiteys?
Do you feel perhaps you were indoctrinated into hating your country because of a notion of victimhood?
Do you not agree that Australian Aboriginals have more per capita spent on thier wellbeing than any other aboriginals in the world?

Then do you accept that the poor bastard that this artcle was written about was a lot worse off than any aboriginal in this country considering the access to welfare and the hand out mentality that the gvment has?
Bleeting on about stolen land serves aboriginal peoples know good it just keeps them in aperpetual state of victimhood and hatred for the majority of people here. It only serves those who make money form the aboriginal industry to keep trying to strive to keep the divide.
Dont hate people for what was Rainy, this country wasnt stolen we got it fair and square.
But as long as your making a quid thats alright.
Its not John Rainbird is it from CAFNEC?
Posted by SCOTTY, Sunday, 14 January 2007 7:59:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I will bother addressing the totally absurd parallel some have tried to make between David Irving and 'the majority of Muslims'. Apparently, today's reverse political correctness means we can assert all Muslims are our enemy and suggest we should keep them all out of Australia, but we can't say it's racist when people slander Muslims based on assertions with as much intellectual substance as the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Apparently this is lefty moonbattery to say such things.

In regard to genuine questions about the rules surrounding whether people like David Irving can come into the country, such rules, which have been in place for some time, don't go to people's religious beliefs. People can be denied an entry visa for a range of reasons - usually it's because there is deemed to be an unacceptable risk of overstaying. However, there are also character provisions - such as if they belong to a proscribed terrorist organisation, or if the Minister believs they may be a threat to public order or safety. So technically David Irving wasn't kept out of Australia because he was a holocaust denier, but because it was felt his presence and actions here on a speaking tour could have threatened public order or were not in the public interest.

More recently, a former inmate of Guantanamo Bay was prevented from coming here to help promote the film "Road to Guantanamo", even though he had been to many western European countries without incident. There is also the US peace activist Scott Parkin, who was removed from Australia on the basis of an ASIO assessment which so far he has not been given any details of. Unclear where the threats to public order, safety or security are in these folks, but there you go. There's huge government discretion and subjectivity in these things of course, but that's the rationale.

All of which makes it all the more absurd that people of high integrity and proven worth like Ali Sarwari have suffering deliberately inflicted on them and are forced out of Australia.
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Monday, 15 January 2007 4:02:22 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
At least Divergence made an effort to relate their comment to the original article - if only so they could then run an anti-migration line.

The notion that "The harsh treatment of this particular family ..... can be reasonably attributed to the Howard government's attempt to deflect attention from its mass migration policy" is an interesting one. I think the government made plenty of political gain out of demonising asylum seekers from the Middle East - they didn't really need a secondary reason. In any case, the relatively large migration intake is hardly a secret, althouh I guess picking on a few easy targets and painting them as 'undesirables' may help assuage xenophobes.

I can't comment on the USA, beyond saying their labour and welfare systems are very different to here, even if Mr Howard is moving things somewhat in that direction. I have seen no substantial research which shows migration to have harmed the living standards of blue collar workers in Australia. I have seen research to the contrary, and that took a very narrow, short-term view of costs and benefits - which would normally underestimate the positives.

By contrast, Horus, having had attention drawn to his litany of incorrect assertions, does nothing to correct them but instead just further changes the topic - to something even more off-topic. Apparently speaking out about injustice has to be matched by monetary contributions in Horus' curious universe. Overt display of charitable giving have been rightly bagged since (at least) Jesus' time, but Horus seems to want a 'public acts of charity' competition - I wonder how he'd go?

Nothing more needs to be said about SCOTTY's contributions after his last effort - "this country wasn't stolen, we got it fair and square"?!
Posted by AndrewBartlett, Monday, 15 January 2007 4:07:42 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well beam me up scotty!

Gee do you feel better now that you got that off your chest?

If the ADF is full of people like you we have a much more serious problem in our hands than a cheeky Mufti.
Posted by Rainier, Monday, 15 January 2007 5:35:11 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Andrew says:
“By contrast, Horus, having had attention drawn to his litany of incorrect assertions, does nothing to correct them”

What incorrect assertions were those Andrew?
The Sarwari family was not the only family/group you championed.
Its was merely the one you choose to highlight on this occasion, since you no doubt thought it had more potential to “prick the conscience of the” electorate.

My (very salient) point was that you failed to mention the manner in which “most” refugees from the Middle East arrive here. As any school boy knows (though apparently NOT some politicians) to get to Aust. from Afghanistan or Iraq you have to by-pass or pass-through some 13 countries. Apparently the Democrats believe that the refugees suddenly materialized just outside our territorial waters (talk about ‘beam me up Scotty’ –where are they beaming down from ? -must be another Bermuda Triangle out there!)

The reality is the refugees have often landed in such intermediary countries – stayed in such countries for long periods of time ( unmolested – I might add)- but never once sought to legitimize their stay– you see they had a particular location in mind -from day one. They’d clearly been well briefed about you, Andrew, with you big heart & even bigger tax-payers cheque book).

And please don’t feed me that line that they were ‘running from extremism’. Since to get to Aust. they had to by-pass or pass-through such MODERATE, Moslem states as Jordan & Kuwait ( who despite not being signatories to Refugee Conventions –DO accept Iraqi refugees) and/ or such MODERATE, Moslem states as Malaysia & Indonesia .

Andrew,its strange that your concern for the refugees human rights ,whilst in refugee camps, does not carry through to concerns for their human rights threatened by traditional values systems, once they settle. But I guess there are more brownie points to be gained from slaying “rednecks” than challenging feudal values & patriarchal overloads.

And as for my question about your own contributions to charity.
“I AM SORRY IF YOU & SOME OTHER PEOPLE FIND[the question] SO CONFRONTING”
Posted by Horus, Tuesday, 16 January 2007 7:38:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well at least Andrew is out there, publlicy known, doing what he believes in, open to scrutiny, not hiding in here in OLO like a mongrel dog barking in the dark.
Posted by Rainier, Tuesday, 16 January 2007 10:18:02 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
THe World now has close to 7 billion people.Many who now want to flee to Australia cannot make their own political and economic system work.If their attitudes and level of education have brought chaos to their beloved lands,what will these same attitudes do for Australia?China, one of the most densely populated countries on the planet is booming.They take no cultures that are averse to their own.

Why do we punish ourselves with cultures who basically hate our guts?
Posted by Arjay, Tuesday, 16 January 2007 11:29:14 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Arjay, can you tell me more about the thinking behind your statement

"If their attitudes and level of education have brought chaos to their beloved lands,what will these same attitudes do for Australia?"

In Australia, the loss of skilled workers (the so-called 'brain drain') has been offset by a gain of migrants through skilled migration programs.

This clearly suggests people are immigrating here for work not political reasons.

And it should be noted that at least one quarter of the current Australian population were born outside Australia.
Posted by Rainier, Wednesday, 17 January 2007 10:41:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Senator Bartlett,

As opposed to countries such as Finland with low population growth and little immigration, the US and Australia have shown similar patterns of economic development over the past thirty years, with growing social inequality, rising housing costs, overstretched infrastructure and public services, and stagnant real wages at the middle and bottom. Immigration/population growth is not the only factor here, but it is drawing a very long bow to claim that it is irrelevant. Bob Kinnaird has done several studies on the effects on the IT industry here of 457 visas, and has found much the same sorts of negative effects on workers that George Borjas found in the US. (Technically, 457 visa holders are not migrants, but the effects are the same.) Ingrid Linsley's 2005 study, Causes of Overeducation in the Australian Labour Market, found that nearly 30% of workers are overqualified for their jobs.

Horus, I agree with you about asylum shopping, which was forbidden by Article 31 of the 1951 Refugee Convention. However, our diplomats and politicians signed away our right to object to it in the 1990s. (See some of Marilyn Shepherd's posts on other threads.)
Posted by Divergence, Thursday, 18 January 2007 9:17:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You refugee advocates need to consider why people might be hostile to you instead of trading insults with them and assigning your opponents the worst possible motives.

Folk on the Left like to pretend that there are plenty of resources to go around. In fact, it would take three Earths to give everyone a modest European standard of living (see the Redefining Progress website). Senator Bartlett was elected to represent the people of his state, not as member-at-large to a world parliament. Things aren't ducky here: horrific conditions in Aboriginal communities, widespread homelessness, two year waits for some elective surgery, no dental care for the poor, etc., etc. Look after your own people first, then talk about how to help foreigners, to the extent that we can.

The folks who go all dewy-eyed about multiculturalism and refugees are not usually those whose own jobs or neighborhoods face any threats. They also tend to be well paid, so can afford private health care and education if the public systems crumble.

It is far more efficient to help poor foreigners in their own country, with the bonus of not encouraging more population growth. The settlement costs of one family would give a whole village a school, clinic, or clean water supply.
Posted by Divergence, Thursday, 18 January 2007 9:38:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy