It is contradictory to have a refugee policy that is based on anything but need.

But isn't it charming to watch the capitalist media all combining forces and claiming that they're not racist.

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s2054150.htm

Whoops.

Unsound resettlement policies DENY the human rights of existing people to a harmonious, civil society.

Indiscriminate refugee acceptance will result in social upheaval of the worst kind.

THE SWISS have suddenly realized this, and with 20% of their population 'foreigners' 29%voted for a right wing anti immigration party ...at LAST.
But this is
a) Too little, possibly too late.
b) More 'reactionary' rather than responsible policy and could have been avoided BY responsible and discriminatory policy.
Yes.. DISCRIMINATORY.. if I have to I'll spell it out.. stand at flinders street with a sign to that effect.. until we 'get' it that discrimination on reasonable grounds is NOT...'wrong'.

BAD NEWS.... yes.. that it had to wait until there was a 'right wing reaction' is the tragedy of it all.. the early warning signals were there.. have been for ages... but...governments being what they are.. are loathe to deal with these issues head on when they are an embryo.
No..they wait till someone is killed on the level crossing b4 putting up boom gates.. same with other things.

A BLACK SHEEP AMONGST SOME WHITE ONES...is not a racist outburst..it is a pictorial representation of a western proverb about a child who does wrong. "the black sheep of the family" and I'm sorry.. we have absolutely ZERO need to change our own culture just because some foreigners who happen to be black...take exception and wrongly understand our culture.
Sheep are mostly white....get over it.

You won't hear the full story in the news.. but being in a gym which is also attended by a riot policeman, I get some 'inside' stories.
Sudanese and Islanders and whites are involved in assaults DAILY at Dandenong station. There is a polarization of ethnic groups.
There is an answer, its called 'responsible and selective immigration based on cultural cohesian and compatibility'.

No..I'm not saying "kick them out" or "No more" I'm saying that measures to facilitate integration and adjustment are needed.
Maybe I'll go over and have a chat with them :)

I find it amazing that we are telling people to integrate. When whites first came to Australia we didn't integrate,we took over and forced our way of life on others.Don't get me wrong,i feel integration is very neccessary,i just wonder if the aboriginals felt the same when the white man overran the country.Food for thought.Actually i believe their to be to many people being let into the country,especially the non-productive ones and the people who refuse to accept our standards and way of life.

Hi Haygirl
the real 'down to earth' issue today.. is not so much the order of arrival. Everyone 'arrives' at some point.
I think the most important thing is..that at least one reasonably homogenaeous group can sufficiently get a handle on things and give some semblence of order for the rest.

The indigenous culture and tribal life would never have survived to this day without some other power taking them over, simple coincidence of history made it 'us'.

So.. your point about "we didn't integrate" is not only true, but VITAL to understanding why Australia developed the robust character it has today.
1/ We did not integrate with indigenous ways. (which of the many tribes 'ways' would be integrate to anyway ?)

2/ We forged an identity and a history separate from the indigenous.

3/ Now we are world players in a smallish kinda way, and have alliances which should in theory guarantee our on going freedom.

4/ That alliance (Anzus) does not place unbearable burdens or conditions on us of a financial or economic or trade nature.

In summary.. we have it pretty jolly good.

I see no valid reason whatsoever for Indigenous PEOPLE not integrating with the rest of the PEOPLE in Australia. I suggest ..that 'not' to do so is quite racist.

"The indigenous culture and tribal life would never have survived to this day without some other power taking them over,..."(Another BOZO gem!)

RUBBISH!!

Your missionary zeal is pernicious. How many poor buggers have you forced to the path of true righteousness BOZO?

I assume what Boaz meant was simply that if it wasn't the Brits dumping their convicts here in 1788, it would have been someone else on some other colonisation mission, which I think is a pretty safe bet.

It occurs to me that perhaps we have a moral obligation to confer with the indigineous people regarding what level and what nature of immigration *they* view as acceptable. Given them they've been given no choice in the takeover of the land the last 200+ years, maybe some amends could be made.