Banjo,

You still can't spell 'hypocrisy' nor, it seems, do you even know what it means. The only thing I have been 'caught out' doing is asking for evidence in support of the wild claims that have been made.

Your use of the term 'invaders' in this context is ludicrous - about as appropriate as your use of 'hypocrisy' - unless you're one of those people who think words can carry any meaning you wish to give them. If people are going to have a reasonable discussion, they've got to use words in a reasonable manner.

Agree with Frank Gol. Bizarre and weird and think severalother posters have proven most dishonest in their ad hominems on that poster.
Only Howard and the US rulers, of ALL humanity could summon the Chutzpah to enact such a crude denial of human rights.
The US regularly welcomes right wing Cubans fleeing the Castro government. Yet it oppresses those fleeing from its satellite Haiti, a failed, starving and brutalised state now for generations.
The sheer crudity of shifting Haitians and other victims of other Latin American banana republics propped up by the US under the carpet via the "Pacific Solution" is only matched by Howard's gall in "offshoring" hapless Afghanis, Sri Lankans, West Papuans, Philipino dissidents and Iraqis and Palestinians, all uncomfortable reminders of US and Australian policy failure in this region, to "their" Concentration camp; Gitmo!
And don't give me the "immigration' line, anymore. I fell for plausible deniability after Tampa, but the truth finally outing about Iraq, the crude antics of DIMIA over time and the abuse of 457 visas to import cheap offshore labour to undermine local workers, have all convinced me of the hypocrisy and incorrigibility of the current government.

Understanding perfectly a need for protection and practically assuming one’s will for a better life and opportunities could hardly suggest that those seeking asylum rather than mere economical gains, makes their ways as far as in Australia.

Therefore, seeking better opportunities is not an asylum-seeker