Well.. I'm sure by now most of us have heard the news. The boat saved off our northern coast was filled with 3 families of Indonesian "economic refugees" who's claim is "Australian Law has created economic hardship for them, and is thus responsible now to look after them"

Who are they ? They are people who had made their living STEALING fish from Australian waters.
Illegal fishing.. just like me doing illegal cultivation of 'my' vegy garden in YOUR backyard. (because the soil is better than my back yards) Of course I didn't ask your permission, I just came, and started digging. But then.. you came out and told me to get lost, and voila..its YOUR fault that I don't have enough vegies.

My circumstances are tough..I can't support my chosen lifestyle.. so.. I zip over to your place and steal your car.. sell it for some quick bucks, and aah..then all is good.. UNTIL you put a security system in place, and your new, insurance replacement car is not so accessable to me. So...its YOUR fault that I can't buy my new widescreen TV that I'd planned with the proceeds from stealing your new car.

I'm wondering how Bob Brown and the usual suspects on the Left will deal with this one. I guess the word 'COMPASSION' will be hurled around, there will be those who truly believe its 'our' fault that Indonesian fishermen are doing it tough because they can no longer steal our fish. There will be cries and whines of "It's a world for all people, and Australia is part of it, its not 'illegal' to support your family" etc..

Of course, if we did NOT have those tougher laws, one day we will wake up to ZERO fish in the area slashed and burnt by the Indonesians, who then, will look further afield.. hmmm how about illegally taking wild buffalo or camels from the outback? They could salt the meat and take it back to Indo...yep..that could work

They will not stay in Australia the idea that they will is wrong.
BD good to see your Christian concerns for your fellow man, zero that is.
However they will not and should not come for those reasons and the fact they are que jumpers.
Thousands are waiting and have been for years to come and no one should shoulder them aside.

Indeed Belly - Boazy's usual compassion for other people is at the forefront again. Such a good advertisement for Christianity.

While it might spoil Boazy's attempt to stir up some xenophobic froth and bubble over this incident, I'm not aware that there's a recognised status anywhere of "economic refugee". These unfortunates will undoubtedly be repatriated to Indonesia, but not before various interests here have tried to get some political mileage out of them.

Off course they will be sent back.

Maybe before we send them back, they could work-off the incurred debt by tending BD's veggie patch.

So much for the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

This is fascinating to see how various posters react to my terminology. It would make a most interesting psychological study.

Lets re-set the stage, and the actors, and see if the 'response' is the same.

-A bloke in Fitzroy wants money to improve his lifestyle.
-He grabs a baseball bat, goes to the nearest 7/11 and threatens the shop assistant, and makes off with a fist full of cash.

Now....if I condemn this mans actions.... (which I surely do) am I 'lacking compassion' ? Now... think about this one, because the 'baseball bat' is really "I'f you don't hand over your fish, I'll come and squat in your backyard".

I don't know why this suddently turned into a squabble about 'who has no compassion'.. because on what basis should we extend 'compassion' to thieves?

Jesus was in the midst of 2 others on Calvary, one, in humility stated to the man abusing Jesus "we are getting what we deserve, but this man has done nothing wrong" and Jesus response "Today you will be with me in paradise"... he said nothing to the unrepentant thief.

The good samaritan was a bloke who helped a Jew who was AMBUSHED and beaten half to death by thieves. I don't find anything in that parable whatsoever to justify compassion for the thieves who beat the bloke senseless.

Am I missing something here?

These people are just the thin edge of the demographic wedge which would..if unchallenged, reduce Australia, and dare I say Belly,Wobbles and even CJ up there in Academia land to a beggar status.

So far the responses (except for brother Belly:) seem to be more about attacking me.. the old 'ur a bad Christian' ploy rather than engaging on the issue.

If ownership of the resource is in question it's a bit misleading to throw the term 'thief' about.

Boazy: "Am I missing something here?"

Yes, but there's not much hope that you'll ever get it.

Dear BD,

Isn't there something in the Bible about the prodigal son? And doesn't a shepherd value all of his sheep?( Especially the black ones that try to get away?)

I'm no expert but I seem to recall something along those lines ...

Anyway, economic refugees who don't go through the normal channels
will be sent back. The laws are quite clear about that, and they will be enforced . So, don't fret too much.

Hi Foxy.

actually this is a most important test case. It would be a refreshing change if we can stick to the issue rather than trying to undermine peoples character (no, I don't mean you, or Belly)

Romans 13:1

1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.

Now..I see nothing there about exceptions for disgruntled Indonesian fish thieves :) sorry, but I don't. Notice the words "bring judgement on themSELVES" it could not be clearer.

The prodigal son, was about a young ratbag who took his inheritance and squandered it on whores and booze.. and then, after running out of $$$ found himself with the pigs...eating their food.

Rejection of legitimate authority, in this case Australia's maritime/border protection law, will bring inevitable problems as a matter of course.

What interests me though, is whether the Left will pick up on this and try to politicize it.

They did so with what they now describe as "The Barwon 13".. blokes soon to go on trial for alleged terrorist activities.
I watched the defense legal team in action. Rob Starry and gang, It was mind numbing. (at the committal hearing) They did not care a scrap for the significance of any evidence, just focused on how they might make it inadmissable due to some technicality. All I can say is God forbid it is HIS child blown to bits by the next terrorist bombing. How ironic it would be if it was planted by the person he defended..... in that way.

I raised this topic for the reasons in the title.. a litmus test for the Left...... dunk it in the liquid.. pink for alkali, blue for acid..

Please define what you mean by "the Left".

Surely you can't mean the Labor Party. Even the Greens seem to be hovering near the centre these days.

Then again, who is to "the Right" of the Libs?

"Left" seems to have become a generic term for everybody who is critical of any government policy or shows a bit of non-sectarian compassion or human decency.

Very good point Wobbles :) it is indeed becoming difficult to define the poles.
I don't consider myself 'right' economically, or even socially.. I see myself as Christian..and I find problems with the poles of 'right' and 'left'....

I guess the 'Left' I'm thinking of, is the hard nosed 'class struggle' union mob, the Greens, Democrats, bleeding hearts (when that compassion is self defeating or irrational, as would be the case re this specific topic)

The people who mount attacks on Detention centres.. the "Marylin Shepherd" types..

I'd also include a fairly health slab of the '9/11 conspiracy theorists' without meaning to annoy you :)

I guess I also mean those who would use any and all means of destroying the government simply so they can grab a slice of power...
rather than a genuine concern for the issues they use to achieve that goal.

LABOR...LEFT ? read this:

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22806913-601,00.html

"effective laws, effective detention arrangements, effective deterrent posture vis-a-vis vessels approaching Australian waters".

Mr Rudd also said that a referendum on Aboriginal reconciliation, a separate Aboriginal treaty and a republican referendum would not occur in the first term of a Rudd Labor government, if at all.

And he refused to give any commitment to a statutory bill of rights, saying Labor's only promise was to "consult the community" on the issue.

COMMENT.. I could easily vote for such a stand :) But I won't, because there are other 'fine print' issues I dislike.

BOAZ_David,

You observe in your second post to this thread that "So far the responses (except for brother Belly:) seem to be more about attacking me.. the old 'ur a bad Christian' ploy rather than engaging on the issue.". I'd like to comment about that, but first a nit-pick.

In that same post you also asked "Am I missing something here?".

Well actually, you did.

Your unattributed partial quotation with respect to the crucifixion (which had to have come from at least one of the four gospels) moved me to check the record. You were evidently quoting from Luke 23:39-43. The bit you omitted was the content of verse 42: "And he said to Jesus, Remember me, Lord, when You come in Your kingdom."

It makes a difference, that bit left out.

But wait, there's more. If you regard the collective record of the four gospels as being complementary, as opposed to conflicting, testimony, you will be compelled to note that only shortly before this exchange BOTH thieves are reported as having reviled and/or insulted Jesus. Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32 refer. (John must have been temporarily absent from the immediate situation, for he makes no reference to either event, but evidently returned shortly thereafter, for he was there at the end.)

Something evidently occurred to move one of the thieves to warn the other, ".... Do you not even fear God, you that are under the same judgement? And we indeed justly, for we are getting what we deserve for what we did - but this One did nothing wrong." From insult and reviling to defending the insulted and trusting request in at most a couple of hours! Luke 23:39 records where the other thief crossed the line.

I guess my point is that no matter how late in the day it is, its OK for posters to jump off the bandwagon of personal attack that seems to have been recently driven in your direction. I suggest some may be being taken for a ride. I smell a rat. More later.

Boazy: "What interests me though, is whether the Left will pick up on this and try to politicize it."

It seems to me that the only one around here trying to do that is you, Boazy.

I got as far as "baseball" "gardens" and went to page 5.

It may have been mentioned some where here, that our sea boarders changed relatively recently, certainly in my lifetime.
Certainly the forbears of these "criminals" fished what is now Australian territory for hundreds maybe thousands of years?
Provided it was policed why not let them fish in "Australian waters"
Lets hope we get more info on the intrusion before casting stones.
fluff

Boaz,
The big difference I see between these asylum seekers and the ones from the Middle East is that these are entitled to ask for asylum because they came direct and did not pass through other countries.

So, on that basis, Indonesians, Timourese, New Gueanians, Pacific Islanders, Kiwis and some Africians can claim asylum if they come direct. Not sure about Tasmanians though, questionable?

No doubt this latest lot will get legal advice, at our expense, and be given the opportunity to change their claim from 'economic' to 'political'. We are known to be a soft touch.

I noted Kerry Nettle's attempt to disparage our defence services again but the commercial ship, there also, contradicted that.

Boaz David tries to get his point over with emphasis on forecasted violence ,ie, the "baseball bat".
Reminds me of a political party .

Banjo... Taswegians must be kept out at all costs mate :)

err.. do you have a link to the Kerry Nettle article ?

Freediver. "Question about the ownwership of the resource" ?

Thats like is saying that we in fact own the USA because we want to benefit from its bounty.

It doesn't matter if people 'used' to fish a certain area.. the law is the law...and international boundaries must be respected.

Its interesting to see what is happening in Singapore..they keep 'reclaiming' the ocean.. but each time they do, it impacts the international boundary between Sg and Indonesia.

Seems to me we need both 'Resource' protection and then Border protection to cope with the result of the former.

Kerri Nettle speech. found it.

and the dark...ugly truth about the Greens suddenly comes to light.

BEGIN QUOTE:
"There are still 87 people who have been in immigration detention longer than 2 years. One woman has now been detained for 6-and-a-half years.

"Just this week I received a petition from over 10,000 Australians calling for the abandonment of the massive new detention centre on Christmas Island.

"Climate change will create 250 million displaced people between now and 2050. The government is doing nothing to prepare for this.

"Next week I will introduce a Private Members Bill to formally recognise and create mechanisms to deal with climate refugees.
END QUOTE:

COMMENT:
Notice how the thinking went from "some people detained for a long time"

to

250million climate refugees....and OUR government is expected to "prepare" for this.
Run that figure around in your heads 4 a while.. 250 MILLION....

That last bit is a deuzy "Private Members bill..CLIMATE refugees"

I don't have a problem accepting Pacific Islanders. But 250 MILLION.... how many millions would Kerri suggest we take in ?

I think they sniffed out a Labor victory.Now let's see.Indonesia has 250 million,China 1300 million,India 1000 million,surely the tax payers of Aust can afford to keep a few million economic refugees who are over populating their own countries.After all,we have a bottomless pit of money.

We give them our manufacturing jobs,sell them energy so the demand escallates prices,thus lowering our living standards.Kevin could just print more when the well runs dry.We could call it Kevinomics.The good thing about becoming a third world nation is that you have more time to contemplate your navel and you don't have to pay any tax,you don't have Govt bureaucrats bleeding your business dry.Everyone can live in the equality of poverty and only
have to worry about where the next meal is coming from.This would be left wing nervana.

It will be interesting to see the value of the Aussie dollar in 12mths time.

So gracious in defeat.

BD

"It would be a refreshing change if we could stick to the issue rather than trying to undermine people's character."

I agree entirely. It is you though who has premised this whole thread on character assassination right from the beginning. Your statement that these boat people have made their living STEALING fish from Australian waters clearly undermines the character of these Indonesian families, or don't THEIR characters count?

I agree with freediver and fluff4 that we need more information about the history and the fairness of the Indonesian and Australian fishing borders before this debate can proceed with any integrity and certainly before we can legitimately label these people as thieves.

To use your vegie garden analogy, if you arbitrarily changed the borders between our properties to increase the size of your land and I continued to garden in soil which was once mine but had since become yours, many would argue that irrespective of the new legalities of the situation I still had a certain degree of right on my side.

We must also remember that, rightly or wrongly, many Indonesians most probably regard Australia as being excessively greedy in regards to this whole fishing situation. They see us as a wealthy country with a large land mass and a sparse population of 20 million, while they struggle with a population of well over 200 million squeezed into a small mass of islands and with the majority of them barely managing to eke out a decent existence.

We need a bit of perspective in this argument BD.

Boazy: "Run that figure around in your heads 4 a while.. 250 MILLION...."

Don't you just love the way that xenophobes try to ratchet up their fear and loathing campaign with wildly inflated figures? The estimates are that there may be 250 million people displaced worldwide over the next half century. Nobody's suggesting that anything like that number should come to Australia.

That one's even sillier than a certain claim a while ago that 20 million Bangladeshi refugees were set to invade Norway.

It's just stupid dog-whistling - aimed at particularly dumb dogs too, apparently.

Boazy,they are not Taswegians.The place is called Tasjerkistan.They are Tasjerkistanians.They are fearful of having sex in case they become more inbred.As reflected in the name they can only have sex with themselfs.This is why their populations is fallings.

Borat is lookings to retire there in the near futures when he finishing with all the other Stans.Did you know there is a place called Icantstan.Infacts,Borat can't stand anyone.

Arjay... yes, I smiled at your post :)

FREEDIVER.. I'm questioning your ownership of your back yard.. and I'll be around in a few minutes to relieve you of your possessions..... happy now ? :) that simply shows how absurd is your statement "if the ownership is disputed"...great SCOTT.. why don't I dispute the ownership of BALI..and claim I can go there and take its produce..

I mean...come ON.... There might be a dispute.. but there is no basis for it. So, tough biccies for them. 'Our' Fish.. not theirs. Go Home Indonesian fish thieves!

Boazy: "I mean...come ON.... There might be a dispute.. but there is no basis for it. So, tough biccies for them. 'Our' Fish.. not theirs. Go Home Indonesian fish thieves!"

Our resident history buff and very poor advertisement for Christianity is in top form.

Isn't the fish a symbol of Christianity? I thought it referred to a myth about Jesus sharing fish in an adverse time, but then again I make no claims to biblical scholarship...

Actually, the ancestors of these guys from Roti have been fishing in what is latterly Australia's economic zone since before 'Australia' or 'Indonesia' existed. While might will undoubtedly prove to be right - which appears to be Boazy's Christian version of history in general - the legitimacy of Australia's extended borders for economic purposes is indeed questionable.

Dear dear CJ :)

u do have some points there.. in terms of my vocabulary and 'tone' .... must sound a little harsh I guess...

I think the 'harshness' is not the main issue, but the 'tone' probably is. I tend to 'get going' a bit on these kinds of issues, but I rejoice in that you make a contrast with a Jesus who seems to you to be much kinder... this is good.

It matters not that people have been fishing certain areas, but I suggest your history may not be entirely correct.
-Fishermen will not go further than they need in order to bring home a catch.
-Subsistence level fishing is usually sustainable in the immediate area of populated Islands
-Main reasons for going further afield are:
a) Decimation of local fish stocks.
b) COMMERCIAL interests provoking higher than neccessary catches.

Some History:
http://epress.anu.edu.au/apem/boats/mobile_devices/ch02s06.html

The native Christian population engages in agricultural activity, local strand collecting, and >>inshore fishing in small boats<<. They are ‘not noted for their open sea sailing traditions’ (Fox 1998: 126).

"This kind of maritime trading activity would account for some Muslim settlement in Pepela, possibly commencing in the early twentieth century but most probably after the 1920s. Subsequent settlement by other Muslim groups appears to be the result of fishing activity undertaken in the Timor Sea."

So there you go. Dare I say you are 'playing fast and loose with truth' ? :) as you are want to say of me.

Nah..lets leave squabbles aside and cut to the real issue here.
In spite of my 'robust' verbage, the core matter is sovereignty and the implications of not enforcing it. The moment you allow 'economic' refugees, who's coming is based on the enforcement of our laws, you open a veritable pandora's box for 10s of 1000s to come.
Agree or disagree?

*Gut feelings are often right*......

more info about these 'poor fishermen'.....

http://epress.anu.edu.au/apem/boats/pdf/ch04.pdf

However, by examining Bajo narratives in conjunction with some of these historical sources, it is possible to identify some of these fishermen as Bajo from Mantigola and Mola, and hence to provide dates for early Bajo fishing activity in the north Australian region.

So....lets ask 'WHO' are the Mantigolan Bajo?
-Could they represent a security risk for Australia ? (by their history and religious disposition)

Lets allow the ANU document to answer:

However, since the late 1980s, the most significant migration of Bajo from Mola and Mantigola — not just male members of the community but also women and children — has been to and from the village of Pepela on the island of Roti.

Is there a connection between Islamic extremism and the Bajo from Roti who are turning up on Australian shores?

YOU BET THERE IS!

Kahar Muzakkar led an Islamic based rebellion in South Sulawisi, where tens of thousands of Christians have been persecuted and killed.
His son is still there..standing for election.
Bajo from South Sulawisi have migrated to PEPELA..
Bajo fishermen from PEPELA are turning up on AUSTRALIAN territory.

Game over CJ.

ps. I can tell you a few stories about 'Bajo' cultural characteristics from my time in Malaysia (They are also in SAbah).. fits the pattern perfectly.

Your ability to deal in half-truths, Boaz, is one of your least endearing trademarks.

This time, you omitted to mention a phrase from the same article that puts the Muslim fishing activities into some perspective:

"Most land is owned by the native Rotinese, so the Muslim inhabitants are dependent on the sea for their income"

However, you even more conveniently omit reference to the part of the paper that totally supports CJ's point, which was, if you recall, that:

>>Actually, the ancestors of these guys from Roti have been fishing in what is latterly Australia's economic zone since before 'Australia' or 'Indonesia' existed.<<

The preface to the paper you cite states explicitly that:

"If we accept Flinders' account and recognise the “dry shoal lying to the south of Rotee” as Ashmore Reef, then it follows that the Bajo arrival on the northern coast of Australia was roughly contemporaneous with the arrival of Captain Cook in Botany Bay. What is remarkable, however, is not these early dates, but the fact that Bajo sailing patterns at least to the seas in and around Ashmore Reef continue to this day."

I know that this does not do anything for your case, but this should be the least of the reasons for leaving it out - you should surely be far more concerned with openness and honesty.

Or is that also something that you can make up as you go along?

As an afterthought, this probably illustrates the reason why you use inaccessible audio presentations so much - you get found out far more quickly when you support your argument with text.

Thanks Pericles. I was about to make much the same points.

Boazy: "Dare I say you are 'playing fast and loose with truth' ?"

Well no, actually - as Pericles has demonstrated. I'll just add, from the same souce as that from which you've very serlectively quoted:

"Until 1952 Indonesians were free to fish anywhere off the coast of Australia and its islands so long as they were outside the 3 nm limit of territorial waters (Campbell and Wilson 1993: 115). In 1952, the Commonwealth Pearl Fisheries Act came into force, making it illegal to collect sedentary species on the continental shelf. [3] In the following year Australia made a unilateral claim over the entire continental shelf in order to protect pearl shell resources from Japanese fishing activities. Although the Australian Government now had the legal powers to prosecute Indonesian fishermen as well, it did not yet have the capability to apprehend them"

http://epress.anu.edu.au/apem/boats/mobile_devices/ch05.html

I'll also reiterate that there's no such official status as "economic refugees". While the fishers from Roti may have legitimate grievances, these are not currently recognised in international law.

Further, your attempt to link them with Muslim extremists is just another tawdry dog-whistling effort from good old Islamophobic Boazy. "Game over" indeed - you're having a lend of yourself, old chap.

Glad you are entering the fray Perilous... you are always good at doing the very thing you accuse others of :)

'dealing in half truths'....

There are seveal elements of my position..
-Security risk of these people based on their history and religios disposition.
-Economic Risk due to:

http://www.insideindonesia.org/edit54/watson.htm

"Several fishermen claimed it would take a month to catch in Indonesian waters what it would take a week to catch in Australian waters. This is partly due to overfishing and lack of marine management in Indonesia compared to Australia."

I notice that the article I quote from above also says this:

>>Local tradition says Papela was established during the sixteenth century as a base to fish for shark and trepang around the sandy islands and reefs between north-western Australia and Roti. So Papelans have been fishing there for 500 years.<<

THE ANU article says:

From at least the 1720s (Mitchell 1994: 56) until the early 1900s fleets of perahu sailed from Makassar (South Sulawesi) to the northern Australian coast each year to collect trepang.

Where did they come from ? SOUTH SULAWISI! not Pepela. they were not 'Papelans' they are Makassans, who use Papela as a base at times.

This probably explains why, when their Islamic rebellion failed in South Sulawisi, they headed for Papela!

So.. my point remains absolutely unchallenged.

-SECURITY RISK (Islamic extremism)
-ECONOMIC RISK (lack of control in Indonesia=fishing in Australia)

The to-ing and fro-ing of ancient practices cannot overide current power balances and UN recognized maritime/economic/sovereignty zones.

Several fishermen claimed it would take a month to catch in Indonesian waters what it would take a week to catch in Australian waters. This is partly due to overfishing and lack of marine management in Indonesia compared to Australia.

Protection of resources from overfishing is something I thought you would support? If these people have hardship...they can go back to Makassar from whence they originally came.. Oh wait.. the Indo government doesn't like hotbeds of radical Islamic extremism either.

One more point.....

ECONOMIC.
http://epress.anu.edu.au/apem/boats/mobile_devices/ch06.html

"According to the Bajo, shark fin became the main product sought during the late 1960s and early 1970s when market prices in China and Southeast Asia rose in response to growing consumer demand. Twenty-eight men recall undertaking shark fishing voyages in the Timor and Arafura seas between 1969 and 1979, and for some, this was the first time they went sailing to Australia. Two of their accounts indicate the patterns and motivations for shark fishing at the time."

So, lets be under no illusions as to the diabolical nature of this trade.. it catches sharks.. cuts off the fins... discards the bodies and returns to the Chinese traders for 'soup' at expensive Chinese resturants.

It is as bad and foul as taking Tigers for body parts, Elephants for Ivory and Bears for Gaul bladder bile. It's obscene..obnoxious and horrible. The fact that people 'gain an income' from it, and thus might be defended is ludicrious. It's tantamount to defending the Mafia for loss of income when illegal practices are shut down.

Come' on.. lets get serious here. There are so many reaons why Australia's actions are morally and legally right that I don't know why you blokes bother to differ

Another of your least endearing trademarks, Boaz - and you seem to be collecting them like trophies at the moment - is your ability to change the subject as soon as you are caught out.

Let's go back a bit, shall we?

Your starter post was full of self-righteous indignation about Indonesian thievery:

>>people who had made their living STEALING fish from Australian waters... one day we will wake up to ZERO fish in the area slashed and burnt by the Indonesians<<

A couple of posts go by on the same theme...

>>These people are just the thin edge of the demographic wedge which would..if unchallenged, reduce Australia... to a beggar status<<

...and the rationale:

>>I raised this topic for the reasons in the title.. a litmus test for the Left...<<

You make a quick detour into climate change...

>>250million climate refugees....and OUR government is expected to "prepare" for this<<

CJ then points out that fishing might have been a traditional thing, at which point you pull out the article and wave it about.

Up to this point, not a single peep from you about the dog-whistle you are now brandishing about:

>>So.. my point remains absolutely unchallenged. -SECURITY RISK (Islamic extremism)<<

If it weren't so sad, it would be funny.

I haven't read all the responses, and it seems this has already been pointed out, but obviously the original analogy is incorrect - it was their vegie patch, and we stole from it.

Boazy wrote: "Now....if I condemn this mans actions.... (which I surely do) am I 'lacking compassion' ?"

Condemn away, but if you don't seek to understand that man's motivations, yes, you are lacking compassion. You are also part of the problem, not the solution. You're also part of the herd.

I'd also add that of all those asylum seekers who has come to Australia by boat, not one has yet been identified as a terrorist. Plenty have been denied asylum, but none have been security risks. Terrorists arrive on planes, with visas - seeking asylym takes many years. It's a ridiculous suggestion, that terrorists may come by boat. In fact, asylum seekers are seldom extremists; they're usually from a cultural minority who is being discriminated against in their home country.

To be honest, this isn't much of a challenge for the left. Have you got a better one?

The point..... is not that 'Australia stole'... we didn't steal anything.

These people fished waters where they did not find any borders. It matters not that they have been fishing there for some centuries.

The world changes. Indonesia DID NOT EXIST when they were originally fishing. (The Portugese first visited Australia. Should we invite them to form a government?)

Points.

1/ ISLAMIST HISTORY
These people are tribal, Islamist and by history are a security threat. (not by specific actions against Australia,but by history in Indonesia..they already tried to establish an Islamic state. The son of their leader (who was killed in the rebellion) is now trying to gain support...again. They come from Papela because they RAN there from the lawful authorities in Indonesia after their insurrection failed.

2/ ENVIRONMENTAL TERRORISTS.. they are killing sharks and taking their fins.. that is the 'primary' catch. Feeding fat cats in chinese resturants. "Sharkfin soup"

The mentality which 'seeks to understand' them..is as deprived of logical thought, and empty of any reasonable thought processes as this bloke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49h1x-i830Q&feature=related

Black former professor: "I conclude we have to exterminate the white man"

Sean Hannity to Black Panther bloke "Sir..do you support this call...or not"

Black Panther bloke "Its all your (white) fault" and he then goes on to list all the sins of the white man, to avoid answering 'yes or no' to the question "Do you support genocide against whites"

Sorry...but supporting these (Indonesian Bajo) people is:

a) Against Australian law
b) Against common sense.
c) Against fundamental decency and morality.
d) Anti Australian and thus UN Australian.
e) Bigoted, racist and self hating.

While Boazy might desperately want to beat this up into a crescendo of dog-whistles, the fact is that it's a complete non-issue. The so-called 'economic refugees' are being sent home because there is no such thing.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/National/Indonesian-boat-people-to-be-sent-home/2007/12/07/1196812996796.html

Boazy also applies his usual regard for the truth in his scurrilous attempt to paint these unfortunates as "terrorists". They are 3 families of fishers who have struck hard times lately and whose desperate attempt to migrate to Australia was rightly rejected.

Nothing more, nothing less.

Boaz says "the world changes".

Fair enough .

But according to you Islamists can never change and poor Indonesian fisherman and their families evidently will always be a threat.

Of course they can change attitudes.

Enlightenment comes from understanding and compassion not bigotry.

CJ... most of what you said there is ok...

but your final bit 'nothing more, nothing less' fails to take into consideration the pressures from various groups to make it much more.. (no, not me :) in fact to turn it into a political issue, a legal playground, and make it a precedent which would endanger the country.

I think it was Robert Mann this morning on ABC who was whining that these Indonesian fishermen did not have 'access to independant legal advice' ..to which I ask 'Why should they' ? they openly declared from their own lips that they were not refugees in the sense of the UN convention...so what's left to say ?

The fact that there are social parasites like Robert Mann infesting our universities and infecting the still idealistic students with mental virusus as this, is why I raise concerns here in OLO.

Thats also why it is more than 'nothing more'....

The obvious extention of Manns approach is that we could get 20million economic refugees from Indonesia alone.. more in fact..
but of course, the country would explode into chaos first, but it seems his ideology is more important than social harmony.

cheers.

Dear K Jim

the people can change..of course.. on the day they renounce Islam and denounce Mohammad.

To see just how horrific intercommunal strife can be..and what these people did, or were a part of, please see this.

Its graphic!

I'm deliberately showing you the 'Muslim' version as well as pointing you to an independant UN report which gives a more balanced picture.

1/ Muslim propoganda version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Bo-ZRb1Edg

(In spite of this, the ONLY people to have been executed were 3 'Christians', they took part in a horrific massacre in 2000, but the conflict began in 1998.. all over a stupid bus fair evasion problem by a Muslim youth who embellished the story into 'Those Christians beat me up') The clip says nothing about what happend to the Christians from 1998 to 2000. But other reports DO.

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003008.html

<<They (the 3 executed men) entered the area where violence was raging to evacuate children from a church-led school in the village of Moengko, Poso City. A Muslim mob came to the church on May 23, 2000 and burned the church down. The children and the three men escaped before the building was razed.>> This was days before the attack on the Muslims.

2/ UN report http://www.hrw.org/press/2002/12/indo1204.htm

The point of offering this, is to show you exactly HOW such events are 'spun' by the Muslims in order to get sympathy, and try to influence political outcomes.

What the clip does NOT show.. is:

1/ How the conflict started.
2/ How many Christians were massacred, and the 10s of 1000s made homeless
3/ The influx of 'Jihadis' from other parts of Indonesia (estimated around 4000) who then did such indescribable things to so many Christians.
4/ The history of the communal strife, which goes back many decades to issues of power sharing.. growth of power of the Muslims, and the deliberate undermining of a clear Christian majority, access to government contracts etc....

all reasons why encouraging 'cultural difference' is total madness for Australia, because THIS....is the end result.

cheers mate.

Why do bad things happen between communities?

Here is a good reason.

http://www.westernresistance.com/blog/archives/003008.html

<<And the real mastermind of the sectarian violence which engulfed Sulawesi and the Moluccas got off scot-free. The violence in Poso was part of a larger war, initiated by the Islamist Umar Jaffar Thalib and his army of Muslims, the Lashkar Jihad. This group was apparently set up with the approval of the then government in 1999. The war they created, the Moluccan War, cost the lives of 9,000 people between 1999 and 2002.

Thalib himself personally ordered the massacre at Soya village, a Christian enclave near Ambon city, which took place Sunday April 28, 2002. At least 21 people died. Small children and women were hacked at with machetes and decapitated, and men beaten to death with staves, beheaded, and burned alive in their homes. Jaffar Umar Thalib was put on trial in 2003, charged with "sowing hate". He was acquitted.>>

Can you imagine how you would feel if your family and relatives have been slaughtered by this animal..and you read "He was acquitted" ?

My last 3 posts all relate to the group from which the 'Indonesian fishermen' come (directly or indirectly). Islamists.

Boaz, I've probably mentioned before that using such anti-Islamic sites as westernresistance.com hardly constitutes presenting a fair and balanced argument.

But visiting the site did raise an interesting issue on which I'd appreciate your opinion.

They feature a story headlined "When Islam And Stuffed Fluffy Toys Collide", retelling the tale of UK teacher Gillian Gibbons at the Sudaneses school, and the teddy bear named Mohammed.

The tale is simple enough. A British schoolteacher is sufficiently unaware of her surroundings to allow her class to give a soft toy the same name as the prophet that is the major religious figure in that country.

Now, the question for you Boaz, is on which side of this discussion do you sit?

Was it the obligation of the foreigner to conform to the norms of the locals, as you keep telling us should happen in Australia.

Or was it the obligation of the country hosting her to overlook her blasphemy against their religion?

Just interested.

Hi Pericles

I think better put, it was not a malicious act on her part.. she did apologise... so my position is that she should have been better informed about sensitivities prior to going.

That's why I studied anthropology b4 going out. Still...it took me 7 yrs before I learned that you don't ask a local (of a particular tribe) his name directly. (it goes back to the headhunting/slave taking days)... when I did ask a helpful local his name (he picked me up as I was walking between villages) he almost choked...but he sure as heck didn't take offense.. he smilingly told me his name after a few seconds, and left it to me to work out why he reacted thus.

I absolutely condemn the Sudanese Muslims for wanting to execute her.. because the issue is always 'intent' or lack thereof.
This was just a cheap excuse to 'get a westerner'..and should be treated as such.

It does show though.. the true nature of Islam when it is not restrained by Western generosity and patience.