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 > Let's not forget the SIEV-X > Comments

Let's not forget the SIEV-X : Comments

By Susan Metcalfe, published 17/6/2008

'Hope', a documentary by Steve Thomas and Sue Brooks, is Amal Hassan Basry’s story - a survivor of the ill-fated SIEV-X.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All
Ah Rob, but who are we to conclude that some poor person from Afghanistan who wants an education for their kids that Afghanistan will never give them deserves to be written off as an "economic" migrant?

The strange thing is that the only 'queue" jumpers are those encouraged by the Federal government to jump that queue because they have buckets of cash and educational standards that we might want.

Amal was an experienced banker before Saddam killed all the adult men in her family, yet we denied her.
Posted by Marilyn Shepherd, Friday, 20 June 2008 2:23:07 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
"Ah Rob, but who are we to conclude that some poor person from Afghanistan who wants an education for their kids that Afghanistan will never give them deserves to be written off as an "economic" migrant?"

Marilyn, this is the kind of "creeping argument" that your critics will jump on straight away and say is the thin edge of the wedge. Once you go down that road, where do you stop? I'm sure there are millions of Tibetans, Mongols, Chinese etc who'd also like to settle in Australia who just haven't thought of it yet. You do have to draw the line somewhere.

All the same, the hypocrisy is pretty thick, I think, when economic migrants can teem through the "front door" with the arms of industry openly extended to them. Border security? Who said border security?
Posted by RobP, Friday, 20 June 2008 2:43:55 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
The Howard government’s policies were aimed not at refugees per se but to counter people smuggling and secondary movement asylum seekers. Secondary movement asylum seekers are asylum seekers who move from a first country of de facto asylum, moving long distances around the world through countries with little interest in persecuting them, in order to settle in affluent Western countries. Almost all secondary movement asylum seekers arrived without identity papers or travel documents, destroying them to make the determination of their identities and verification of their stories of persecution and return to their countries of residence a very time consuming, difficult and costly task.

Kakuma refugee camp in Kenya is one of the largest refugee camps in the world with more than 80,000 refugees from nine different countries and dozens of different ethnic groups. The refugees there are forced to deal with hostile locals, an almost total lack of economic opportunities, frequent gender based violence, high rates of crime and food shortages. Life is particularly harsh for single vulnerable women who have nobody to protect them. Australian’s refugee resettlerment program has a visa category for “Women at Risk” whereby women in such refugee camps can be resettled in Australia, virtually their only chance of escaping their horrific situations.

For a time until people smuggling was effectively halted Australia’s refugee resettlement program had to be suspended as all resettlement places were being taken by secondary movement asylum seekers. The obvious question is why refugees in camps such as Kakuma did not themselves become secondary movement asylum seekers and travel around the world to seek refuge in affluent western countries. The unfortunate reality is that most of the world’s refugees live in abject poverty, not having the $5,000 to $10,000 per person required to pay people smugglers.

As Minister for Immigration, Phillip Ruddock visited refugee camps in Africa and Asia and to his credit worked diligently to halt people smuggling and the influx of secondary movement asylum seekers, so that resettlement was returned to being on the basis of need rather than financial ability to pay people smugglers.
Posted by franklin, Friday, 20 June 2008 3:14:53 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
re Rob/Marilyn, didn't the government (eventually) end up finding a massive majority of boat people circa 2000- 2003 were in fact genuine, as claimed by people like the film makers and Marilyn herself, who ended up meeting many refugees personally and hearing their stories (eg Amal).
What was Ruddock on about then, when he did his "queue jumper" beat up?
Contempt prior to investigation to avoid a tricky political situation for howard?
Sounds familiar, that!
Posted by paul walter, Friday, 20 June 2008 3:58:29 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
CJ Morgan “More like unexpectedly seeing an uncouth acquaintance at an art exhibition, and realising they have some redeeming features after all.”

That’s the problem when you judge people, relying on your own ignorance. Personally I would find a redeeming quality the last thing to expect in you.

Paul walter “wasn't the reason the boat was overloaded due to reasons beyond the control of the victims”

Only if they were forced onto the vessel.

As I said before “volenti non fit injuria”

Marilyn Shepherd ”amazingly gutsy woman dying of cancer”

bugger all, no point in coming to Australia to get treatment, unless she was prepared to pay. Medicare does not even extend to family reunion migrant cases where the reunion party is beyond working age.

“She was not a criminal, nor a queue jumper, nor any of the other vile things the Col Rouge's of this world choose to think.”

I made no suggestion to her status, except, she cannot be separated from the actions of the rest of the boat passengers and crew who were intent on circumventing Australian migration, customs and quarantine laws.

Really Marilyn. “sentimentality” will get you no where, it is the dross of the debating forums.

And descent to name calling re “For the haters I say this” says more about your own lack of emotional stability than anything about those you address it to (which I assume includes me).

RobP “We tend to get two diametrically opposed views on this topic.”

I have no problem with refugees who follow due process and act responsibly. I do have problems with people who try to circumvent the processes and disciplines which other folk are prepared to wait in line for. The queue jumpers do not deserve to be treated with any favour simply because they jumped the queue, quite the opposite.

The furphy about being in harms way in their country of origin does not cut it either because all these “refugees” moved out of “harms way” before they got to Australia.

I waited in line to migrate too.
Posted by Col Rouge, Saturday, 21 June 2008 6:01:17 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
Col I don't care if you waited in some stupid line for approval, the point is you were migrating, Amal and the thousands of others were fleeing for their lives. She didn't come to Australia for cancer treatment you brainless thug, she was diagnosed after she had been here for a year and died a few years later.

And Franklin. Dear god in heaven. How many times do we have to read your lunatic drivel about secondary movement - there is no such thing in the refugee world. You have to keep moving until there is somewhere safe but every time there is a story about a refugee you bob up with this tripe.

The refugee convention actually covers what you call secondary movement by article 1D which states people are not entitled to protection if they have protection in another country. Not one refugee has ever been refused in Australia because of that clause so go away.

As for this ongoing hatred some of you display - the people you now hate are Australian citizens with the same rights as you so I hope they sue you for libel.
Posted by Marilyn Shepherd, Saturday, 21 June 2008 9:58:16 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
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. 10
  12. All

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