Banjo: "Horus, One wonders if rstuart and others will take any notice of the information you gave"

Banjo, Horus supplied "information" without any evidence to verify it. But given Horus has also suggested I am connected with people smuggling, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3171&page=0#75927 I'd be an idiot if I just accept anything Horus has to say at face value. Right now, given your complete refusal to back any of your claimed facts with evidence it is entirely possible you are playing me along just like Horus; making up facts as you go along just to justify your view of the world. You may be happy to discuss what is happening in such a fantasy world, but I am not. Personally I think such discussions should confined to a psychiatric ward, not held in a public forum. So is goodbye for now.

Yabby: "two million refugees returned to Afghanistan when the Taliban were defeated."

You will get no argument from me that refugees should return to their homeland once conditions have settled down, Yabby. But there are all sorts of ambiguities in your statement. For a start, I'd doubt the mothers of our soliders recently killed in Afghanistan think the Taliban or whatever we are fighting over there are defeated. A link to give context perhaps?

Yabby: "Err is that why so many boat people seemingly later return to their homes countries on holidays, pockets stuffed with money, the envy of their old friends that they left behind?"

First a request: a link. Secondly, if it happened while they were refugees they would not be accepted back. Thirdly, once we give someone asylum it's normally final. But sometime later (maybe a couple of years or maybe decades) their country will become safe to visit again, and when it does I can well imagine them wanting to pay their family and friends. I don't begrudge them that.

Remember when I said "I wish the old Yabby was back"? It was this sort of rubbish that prompted it - you dressing up some harmless fact in a bit of bile and hoping no one would notice.

RStuart

Re “making up facts as you go along just to justify your view of the world. You may be happy to discuss what is happening in such a fantasy world, but I am not.”
Are you telling us laddie you are not happy doing what you do best!
If there was a Guinness-Book-of-Records category for fiddling & fabricating , you’d be sitting up there on top, smug & sovereign ---like an asylum seeking Leprechaun on an aberdour beach.

Below is what I wasn’t permitted to post lasted night –due to the quota system:

RS says : 3) “Singapore isn't a signatory to the UNHCR”
But depending the origin of the “refugees” there are anywhere from a few, to dozens of signatory countries in their path, which they chose to ignore.
You might recall the -short list- that the occupiers of the Oceanic Viking provided – they would not be satisfied with any old haven , It had to be one of the three or four affluent Western nations.

RS says: 4) "Oh, I see. You don't understand why I keep questioning your facts. Perhaps an example [ of non-genuine refugee would been accepted ] would help."
I seriously doubt that any number of facts would HELP you RStuart .
But here’s a tit bit for someone who seems to need a bit of tit.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3171#76100

But RStuart if you want the mother lobe ,and it has been pointed out to you before –and I will point it out again . Have enough gumption to do a little primary research for yourself. Visit some of these –refugees—after they settle in –you might be surprised by the number who are off on the road to Morocco or Mandalay visiting the old country.Perhaps you might even have a road to Damascus experience, yourself –though somehow, I think not –that would be too big a miracle to hope for.

If [ Yabby has been ] insinuating [ you are ] a bit of a dill for not knowing it. Judging from the above, he probably has solid grounds.

Socratease: ¨Then no babies need starve to death...¨

Dear Socratease, I suggest that in your above observation, the ¨no¨ should be ¨fewer¨. Otherwise, I´m glad you see merit in the plan. As for Trishna and Krishna you mentioned in an earlier post, the media reports their relieved mother in Bangladesh said that she wishes the children to stay and be educated in Australia, "We don't want them back because we don't have the ability to take proper care of them." So, dear Socratease, in answer to your question in that post, we can now welcome both babies aboard!

*You will get no argument from me that refugees should return to their homeland once conditions have settled down*

But this is what you are ignoring rstuart. Fact is that under the
Geneva Convention, when things improve, people can go home again.
Our bleating hearts felt that this was inhumane, so temporary
protection visas were dropped. So the pull factor is a permanent
residents visa in Australia, something that millions hope for
and scheme to achieve, one way or another. You just make it
easy for them.

At least RobP shows some realism, acknowledging that there is no
way that our bureaucrats can accurately determine, who is here
for economic reasons and who is genuinely in need of asylum.
Even with documents, its difficult enough to get valid information
from the third world, let alone when people ditch documents.

20 million people live in Afghanistan. The Taliban arn't shooting
them all, but mainly military who are shooting at them, like
Aussies. Yet you have no problem giving mainly fit young Afghan
males a visa, never mind the women and kids who really need help.

http://www.theage.com.au/world/tamils-ride-their-luck-20091030-hptc.html

That is where alot of the Tamils are coming from. Hardly men
in need of asylum.

Once again, your beliefs are neither helping the most needy,
nor are they cost effective. They create loopholes that anyone
with half a brain can jump through, but they do help the Bronnies
and rstuarts of this world sleep a bit better, thinking that they
are "helping those poor people". All emotion and no reason is
sometimes quite dangerous!

Yabby: "Our bleating hearts felt that this was inhumane, so temporary protection visas were dropped.

Here you go again Yabby, spouting crap. The law hasn't been changed - TPV's still available. The "bleeding heart" that decided not to renew most of the TPV's was Howard. The reason for having them in the first place was so we could arrange someone else to give them safe haven - as if that was ever going to happen. At the end of 3 years the broad conditions in Afghanistan hadn't changed, so I presume those responsible for deciding whether they were still genuine refugees came to the conclusion they had to stay.

I happen to think TPV's were a bad idea. There is nothing so permanent as a temporary immigrant on the mainland. They put down roots, get jobs, friends, married, and have kids (who are Australian). At that point only a Yabby could send them home.

Yabby: "The Taliban arn't shooting them all"

True. But why does this matter?

Yabby: "never mind the women and kids who really need help"

So, you would be in favour of accepting boat refugees if they were mostly women and children?

Yabby: "there is no way that our bureaucrats can accurately determine, who is here for economic reasons and who is genuinely in need of asylum"

Whether you are correct or not, that is what we agreed to do when we signed the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Yabby: "Once again, your beliefs are neither helping the most needy, nor are they cost effective."

So now it is my beliefs? You said earlier "For reasons of diplomacy, Australian politicians won't withdraw from the Convention".

You obviously don't want to be in the situation where we are forced to give safe haven to all refugees that arrive on our shores. Fine. But in that case what we have to do is obvious - we must to withdraw from the convention. But for some reason you can't bring yourself to say that. In fact, have you said what you would change? I can only recall you throwing mud.

The increasing heat outdoors, apparently reflected on this page, appears to be aggravating contributors' passions. May I suggest to them: for the sake of others who are trying to follow the threads here, please chill out, don't take yourselves quite so seriously, and don't let other fractious participants bother you into loosing your cool. "When emotion steps in the door, reason flies out the window."