Yabby says:

"I'll make my point again. Why do you and others think that those
who have money are more deserving to live in Australia, then
those left in refugee camps (lots of women and children) without
two cents to rub together?"

Indeeeed Yabby.. I've yet to hear an answer from our misguided, misinformed "I'll believe it cos it wos on TV" bleeding hearts about this rather curious situation.

IF...they have the money to pay people smugglers THEN.. (logical construct) they have the means of getting a foot hold in countries much closer than Australia. They have MONEY... and money talks in those closer countries.

But I'll make my own point again.

It's not...NOT about people.. it's about POLITICS.....

The facade of high and mighty compassion fleeced out by some here is nothing more than a cloak to disguise a different agenda. Thing is..they have convinced themselves that they actually believe this stuff.

They will latch onto the 'poooooor assylum seekers' thing, and naively believe every syllable of a 'documentary' which lends weight to their political cause..but oooh.. NEVER will they believe a documentary which is contrary eh? They would such a thing a "racist attack on poor defenseless vulnerable human beings"

Or..the other favorite, bringing Christianity into it..

If you claim atheism and criticize their agenda "You are heartless bastard"
If you are a Christian and can see thru their shallowness "You are a vile heartlness bastard AND an uncaring Christian" or something to that effect.

What do these people take us for?

Bronwyn and Romany take the 'legal' tac.. and you wonder why I make so much noise about changing some of our laws? (including our signatory status on some UN conventions and state laws about religious vilification)

Forrest Gump

I would suggest that the author has perhaps hit the wrong button. I would also suggest that the Christian Brothers in Australia, unlike Cardinal Pell, do not have a hot line to the pope in Rome.

Phil Glendenning is clearly the director of the Edmund Rice Centre. The Edmund Rice Centre may have affiliations with the Worldwide ERC but so what?

http://www.erc.org.au/index.php?module=photoalbum&PHPWS_Album_id=12&PHPWS_Photo_op=view&PHPWS_Photo_id=90

http://www.acu.edu.au/graduate_association/in_honourable_company/mr_phil_glendenning/

http://pipl.com/directory/people/Phil/Glendenning

In my ten years of working daily with the Christian Brothers, there was never the slightest attempt to convert me to their religion. They are fundamentally a teaching order - not missionaries.

The Worldwide ERC to which you and the author refer, states that since 2004, they have donated to:

The American Cancer Society
Autism Society of Greater San Antonio
California Fire Disaster Relief
Chicago Abused Women’s Coalition
ClinicClowns
DC Candlelighters
Father Joe’s Villages
Fisher House
Friends of the World Food Program
Give Kids The World
Greater Ormand Street Hospital for Children
Habitat for Humanity International
John Dickson Foundation for Kidney Cancer Research
The Make-A-Wish Foundation
Oxfam
Project Hope
The Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago
SafeNest
Salvation Army
Walk the World
Women’s Bean Project

I do believe your allusions to Rome are somewhat fanciful.

Cheers

Secondary movement asylum seekers can be described as 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 in Australia’s migration zone 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.

But what happened when a boat carry secondary movement asylum seekers and heading for Australia was intercepted before documentation was destroyed ?

In July 2001 (just before the arrival of the Tampa) a boat departed from Cambodia for Australia with 241 Afghans and Pakistanis on board, who were believed to have paid between $US5,000 and $US10,000 per person for their journey. Note that the average per capita income of Afghanistan is around $400 per year.

The boat was intercepted and most were found to be carrying Pakistani or Afghan passports, many Afghan documents indicating long term residency of Pakistan. The asylum seekers could have applied to the UNHCR for asylum in Cambodia which is a signatory to the relevant UN conventions. Only after interception did many of the group apply for asylum. Only 14 of 241 (6%) were accepted by the UNHCR as refugees, and the remainder were returned to their countries of origin.

Note the extremely low acceptance rate of this group of secondary movement asylum seekers when intercepted carrying documentation and processed under UNHCR procedures (as is done in refugee camps), contrasting greatly to the high acceptance rates of secondary movement asylum seekers arriving in Australia without documentation and when processed under Australia’s much more lenient legal procedures.

To illustrate this point further the first mate of the Tampa, Christian Malhaus, testified in a Western Australian court during a people smuggling case that during the rescue of secondary movement asylum seekers by the Tampa he actually saw many throw their documentation (“passport like objects”) overboard before boarding.

The majority of the world’s asylum seekers are processed by the UNHCR under strict criteria and with limited access to appeal, and if found to be a genuine refugee must wait until resettlement by another country becomes available. In actuality, few resettlement places are available.

By paying thousands and thousands of dollars to people smugglers to arrive in Australia’s migration zone, secondary movement asylum seekers were provided with two great advantages. Firstly, they gained access to Australia’s very more lenient legal regime with multiple levels of appeal, and secondly, after being found by an easier legal regime to require protection they automatically gained residence.

In 2001, the UNHCR reported that 95% of Iranians seeking asylum in Indonesia were rejected as not being in need of protection. By travelling onwards to Australia and by destroying travel / identity documents, Iranian asylum seekers then had a much higher probability of being found to be in need of protection by Australia’s easier legal regime, and were also guaranteed residence. As a consequence every resettlement place taken by such an Iranian asylum seeker resulted in one less available place in Australia’s refugee resettlement program for a UNHCR refugee.

The Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence reported the existence of coaching schools located in the Pakistan / Afghan border region where Pakistani clients of people smugglers would spend a few months preparing for DIMIA interviews. The Pakistanis were provided with information on common food items, customs and events in Afghan history. People smugglers advised clients to learn about farming techniques, language, and to pretend to be illiterate to evade in-depth questioning.

The Australian Bureau of Criminal Intelligence reported that the people smugglers in Pakistan used copies of Australian interview tapes and information from people released from detention centres, and were well informed about processes used to detect Pakistanis posing as Afghanis. The Pakistanis would claim to be Afghan farmers and recount tales of being taken to fight for the Taliban. Identity checks on suspected Pakistanis were complicated by the use of false names and disposal of identity documents prior to arrival in Australia.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/11/12/1037080728677.html

Some days his ignorance makes me wonder at how often he's prepared to show it. Some days his foolishness makes me cackle. Most times his hypocrisy takes my breath away.

Here he is berating others for "bringing Christianity into it" - a topic on OLO.

I have, after due consideration, decided that Polycarp really hasn't the insight or self-awareness to see how he twists from one position - bringing Christianity into almost any topic - and then berating people who bring Christianity into a topic.

"What do these people take us for?" he asks in a fit of self-righteous indignation.

Don't worry, folks, tomorrow (or more likely today on another thread) he'll be doing exactly what he slams others for doing. And then he'll weep crocodile tears about ad hominem attacks.

So, Porky - the fact that the people who were the subjects of the article were sent back from Australia to Afghanistan to their deaths sits comfortably with you?

<< What do these people take us for? >>

Terms like hypocrite, heartless bastard, xenophobe and odious goose come to mind.

No matter how you and your cohorts try and spin it, the fact is that these unfortunate refugees sought asylum in Australia because they held well-founded fear for their lives in Afghanistan. Under Australia's treaty obligations it was perfectly legal for them to do so. Australian authorities wrongly rejected their refugee status and sent them back to Afghanistan to their deaths.

What a pity we can't deport miscreants like Porky, Mr Right and franklin instead. A few years on Nauru would do them wonders, I reckon.